Showing papers by "Paula Ravasco published in 2005"
TL;DR: During radiotherapy, both interventions positively influenced outcomes; dietary counseling was of similar or higher benefit, whereas even 3 months after RT, it was the only method to sustain a significant impact on patient outcomes.
Abstract: Purpose To investigate the impact of dietary counseling or nutritional supplements on outcomes in cancer patients: nutritional, morbidity, and quality of life (QoL) during and 3 months after radiotherapy. Patients and Methods A total of 111 colorectal cancer outpatients referred for radiotherapy, stratified by staging, were randomly assigned: group 1 (G1; n = 37), dietary counseling (regular foods); group 2 (G2; n = 37), protein supplements; and group 3 (G3; n = 37), ad libitum intake. Nutritional intake (diet history), status (Ottery's Subjective Global Assessment), and QoL (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire version 3.0) were evaluated at baseline, at the end, and 3 months after radiotherapy. Results At radiotherapy completion, energy intake increased in G1/G2 (P ≤ .04), G1 more than G2 (P = .001), and decreased in G3 (P < .01). Protein intake increased in G1/G2 (P ≤ .007), G1 less than G2 (not significant), and decreased in G3 (P < .01). At 3 months...
505 citations
TL;DR: This study aimed to determine the effect of dietary counseling or oral supplements on outcome for patients with cancer, specifically, nutritional outcome, morbidity, and quality of life (QOL) during and 3 months after radiotherapy.
Abstract: Background.
We aimed to determine the effect of dietary counseling or oral supplements on outcome for patients with cancer, specifically, nutritional outcome, morbidity, and quality of life (QOL), during and 3 months after radiotherapy.
Methods.
Seventy-five patients with head and neck cancer who were referred for radiotherapy (RT) were randomized to the following groups: group 1 (n = 25), patients who received dietary counseling with regular foods; group 2 (n = 25), patients who maintained usual diet plus supplements; and group 3 (n = 25), patients who maintained intake ad lib. Nutritional intake (determined by diet history) and status (determined by Ottery's Subjective Global Assessment), and QOL (determined by the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire version 3.0 [EORTC QLQ-C30]) were evaluated at baseline, at the end of RT, and at 3 months.
Results.
Energy intake after RT increased in both groups 1 and 2 (p ≤ .05). Protein intake also increased in both groups 1 and 2 (p ≤ .006). Both energy and protein intake decreased significantly in group 3 (p 90% of patients experienced RT toxicity; this was not significantly different between groups, with a trend for reduced symptomatology in group 1 versus group 2/group 3 (p < .07). At 3 months, the reduction of incidence/severity of grade 1+2 anorexia, nausea/vomiting, xerostomia, and dysgeusia was different: 90% of the patients improved in group 1 versus 67% in group 2 versus 51% in group 3 (p < .0001). After RT, QOL function scores improved (p < .003) proportionally with improved nutritional intake and status in group 1/group 2 (p < .05) and worsened in group 3 (p < .05); at 3 months, patients in group 1 maintained or improved overall QOL, whereas patients in groups 2 and 3 maintained or worsened overall QOL.
Conclusions.
During RT, nutritional interventions positively influenced outcomes, and counseling was of similar/higher benefit; in the medium term, only counseling exerted a significant impact on patient outcomes. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck27: XXX–XXX, 2005
502 citations
TL;DR: Taste alterations are common in patients with cancer, and can be the result of the disease itself and/or its treatment(s), and several effective strategies are available to accommodate taste changes and increase nutritional intake.
157 citations
TL;DR: The results corroborated well-established risk factors and identified emergent nutrients and the interaction diet-colorectal cancer is consistent and the relevance of new nutrients is emerging.
Abstract: Background: Food and nutrition as major causes of colorectal cancer (CRC) are still debatable. Aim of the Study: This cross-sectional study in a Portuguese population aimed to characterize and identify “high-risk” diets/life-styles and explore their associations with colorectal cancer. Methods: In 70 colorectal cancer patients and 70 sex, age-matched subjects without cancer history, we evaluated: diet history and detailed nutrient intake (DIETPLAN5 2002, UK), alcohol (amount, type, years), smoking (number packages/year, years), physical activity, co-morbidities and body mass index. Age-adjusted Relative Risks were calculated, Proportional Hazards models adjusted the analysis for multiple risk factors. Results: Smoking was a risk factor (1.90). Increased colorectal cancer risk regarding the lowest vs the highest intake quartile emerged for: vitamin B12 (3.41), cholesterol (3.15), total fat (2.87), saturated fat (1.98), animal protein (1.95), energy (1.85), alcohol (1.70), iron (1.49), refined carbohydrates (1.39). Reduced colorectal cancer risk for the highest vs the lowest intake quartile was found for: n-3 fatty acids (0.10), insoluble fiber/folate (0.15), flavonoids/vitamin E (0.25), isoflavones/`-carotene (0.30), selenium (0.36), copper (0.41), vitamin B6 (0.46). Conclusion: Our results corroborated well-established risk factors and identified emergent nutrients. Prolonged excessive intake of macronutrients and some micronutrients concurrent with marked deficits of fiber and protective compounds were dominant in colorectal
41 citations
TL;DR: LRR seems to be a significant predictor of distant metastases and survival, and patients who sustain early LRR tend to display a more aggressive clinical course.
17 citations
Journal Article•
1 citations