Cachexia in treatment-naïve gynecological cancer patients: Prevalence, predictors, and clinical associations.

Abstract

e17576 Background: Cancer cachexia is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality, yet its prevalence in gynaecological malignancy is unknown. Prevalence of cachexia in de novo gynaecological cancer patients and the impact of cachexia on clinical parameters and patient-reported outcomes were investigated. Methods: A prospective, exploratory study of newly diagnosed gynaecological cancer patients was conducted at St. James’s Hospital, the largest treatment provider for gynaecological malignancy in the Republic of Ireland. Patients recently diagnosed with a gynaecological cancer were eligible. Demographics, oncological history, Clavien Dindo Classification and length of stay were collected from participants’ medical record. A questionnaire completed by participants on 3 consecutive days collected data on height, weight, weight history, recent dietary intake, nutritional impact symptoms and functional status. Cachexia was defined using the criteria established in 2011 (Fearon and Strasser et al, 2011). Participants’ staging computed tomography scans were utilised for body composition analysis. Descriptive statistics, Mann Whitney U tests and Chi-square were used to summarise and identify significant associations between variables. Logistic regression was used to model predictors of cachexia. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Core Questionnaire in conjunction with EORTC gynaecological cancer-specific modules assessed quality of life. Results: A total of 94 participants were recruited. All five gynaecological cancers were represented. Prevalence of cachexia was 21.4% and was highest in patients with cervical cancer. Any weight loss in the previous month was predictive of developing cachexia. Low albumin and anorexia were associated with cachexia, although neither reached significance. Median post-operative length of stay for cachectic patients was 5 days (range 1-57) compared to 4 days (range 0-27) for non-cachectic patients (p = 0.682). 60% of cachectic patients had some post-operative complication. Cachectic patients were more symptomatic and had lower functional status in all quality of life categories, with the exception of emotional function. Conclusions: As prevalence of cachexia in this population is at least 22%, we strongly recommend screening for cachexia at all clinical assessments. Although weight loss and body mass index can identify the majority of cachectic patients, skeletal muscle mass index should also be included where possible. Its incorporation into standard radiology assessment of cancer patients would be optimal. Further research is warranted in a larger population to fully elucidate the predictors of cachexia. Quality of life is a useful means to monitor symptoms and functional status which may contribute to or exacerbate cachexia.