After completing this course, the reader will be able to:1. Explain how malnutrition (deficit or excess) is used as a decisive factor in treatment of cancer patients.2. Describe the interactions and influences of overweight/obesity on tumor metabolism and of individualized tumor metabolism on tumor burden and undernutrition.3. Use the association of sarcopenic obesity to predict and manage poorer performance status and decreased survival in cancer patients.This article is available for continuing medical education credit at CME.TheOncologist.com. CME CME The Oncologist CME Program is located online at http://cme.theoncologist.com/. To take the CME activity related to this article, you must be a registered user. ABSTRACT Symptom Management and Supportive CareThe Oncologist 2010;15:523-530 www.TheOncologist.com nourished patients according to PG-SGA, 75% were overweight/obese and only 25% were well nourished according to BMI. Concordance between BMI and PG-SGA was evaluated and consistency was confirmed. More aggressive/advanced stage cancers were more prevalent in deficient and excessive nutritional status: in 83% (n ‫؍‬ 235/ 282) of overweight/obese patients by BMI and in 85% (n ‫؍‬ 111/131) of undernourished patients by PG-SGA. Results required adjustment for diagnoses: greater histological aggressiveness was found in overweight/obese prostate and breast cancer; undernutrition was associated with aggressive lung, colorectal, head-neck, stomach, and esophageal cancers (p < .005). Estimates of effect size revealed that overweight/obesity was associated with advanced stage (24%), aggressive breast (10%), and prostate (9%) cancers, whereas undernutrition was associated with more aggressive lung (6%), colorectal (6%), and head-neck (6%) cancers; in both instances, age and longer disease duration were of significance.Conclusion. Undernutrition and overweight/obesity have distinct implications and bear a negative prognosis in cancer. This study provides novel data on the prevalence of overweight/obesity and undernutrition in cancer patients and their potential role in cancer histological behavior. The Oncologist 2010;15: 523-530

Rationale. Nutritional risk screening should be routine in order to select patients in need of nutrition care; this conduct change has to rely on education. In this project, radiotherapy department health professionals were trained on how to use the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), to foster its integration into cancer outpatient management; we also aimed to identify those more adherent to screening.Methods. Research dieticians (the standard) conducted interactive sessions with all physicians, nurses, and radiotherapy (RT) technicians, who were closely supervised to facilitate routine MUST integration. There were two phases: after the first session, phase 1 assessed 200 patients over 4 months; after the second session, phase 2 screened 450 patients, always before RT. Validity was evaluated comparing results from the standard against all other health professionals, adjusted for number.Results. RT technicians were most adherent to the MUST: 80% of patients in phase 1, increasing to 85% in phase 2. Nurses doubled their input, from 19% to 36%. Physicians had poor MUST integration, yet they progressively incorporated percentage weight loss into patient records, increasing from 57% in phase 1 to 84% in phase 2, independently of diagnosis and stage. The highest concordance ( coefficient) with dieticians was found with RT technicians' use of the MUST (p < .002) and percentage weight loss determination by physicians (p < .001).Conclusions. We show that systematic screening in cancer is feasible by all professionals involved, once a proximity teaching project is put into practice. RT technicians, who daily treat patients, were highly adherent to integrate the MUST and might be in charge of selecting at-risk patients. Physicians are unlikely to use the MUST, but acknowledged nutrition value and changed their routine by integrating recent percentage weight loss into their approach to patients. Our structured methodology may be used as a model for the development of teaching adapted to different departments with other realities. The Oncologist 2011;16: 239 -245

No abstract