Supportive and symptomatic management of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

The main aims in the care of individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) are to minimize morbidity and maximize quality of life. Although no cure exists for ALS, supportive and symptomatic care provided by a specialist multidisciplinary team can improve survival. The basis for supportive management is shifting from expert consensus guidelines towards an evidence-based approach, which encourages the use of effective treatments and could reduce the risk of harm caused by ineffective or unsafe interventions. For example, respiratory support using noninvasive ventilation has been demonstrated to improve survival and quality of life, whereas evidence supporting other respiratory interventions is insufficient. Increasing evidence implicates a causal role for metabolic dysfunction in ALS, suggesting that optimizing nutrition could improve quality of life and survival. The high incidence of cognitive dysfunction and its impact on prognosis is increasingly recognized, although evidence for effective treatments is lacking. A variety of strategies are used to manage the other physical and psychological symptoms, the majority of which have yet to be thoroughly evaluated. The need for specialist palliative care throughout the disease is increasingly recognized. This Review describes the current approaches to symptomatic and supportive care in ALS and outlines the current guidance and evidence for these strategies

Bioelectrical impedance phase angle in clinical practice: implications for prognosis in stage IIIB and IV non-small cell lung cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A frequent manifestation of advanced lung cancer is malnutrition, timely identification and treatment of which can lead to improved patient outcomes. Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is an easy-to-use and non-invasive technique to evaluate changes in body composition and nutritional status. We investigated the prognostic role of BIA-derived phase angle in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A case series of 165 stages IIIB and IV NSCLC patients treated at our center. The Kaplan Meier method was used to calculate survival. Cox proportional hazard models were constructed to evaluate the prognostic effect of phase angle, independent of stage at diagnosis and prior treatment history.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>93 were males and 72 females. 61 had stage IIIB disease at diagnosis while 104 had stage IV. The median phase angle was 5.3 degrees (range = 2.9 – 8). Patients with phase angle <= 5.3 had a median survival of 7.6 months (95% CI: 4.7 to 9.5; n = 81), while those with > 5.3 had 12.4 months (95% CI: 10.5 to 18.7; n = 84); (p = 0.02). After adjusting for age, stage at diagnosis and prior treatment history we found that every one degree increase in phase angle was associated with a relative risk of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.64 to 0.97, P = 0.02).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We found BIA-derived phase angle to be an independent prognostic indicator in patients with stage IIIB and IV NSCLC. Nutritional interventions targeted at improving phase angle could potentially lead to an improved survival in patients with advanced NSCLC.</p

Bioelectrical impedance phase angle as a prognostic indicator in breast cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is an easy-to-use, non-invasive, and reproducible technique to evaluate changes in body composition and nutritional status. Phase angle, determined by bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), detects changes in tissue electrical properties and has been hypothesized to be a marker of malnutrition. Since malnutrition can be found in patients with breast cancer, we investigated the prognostic role of phase angle in breast cancer.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We evaluated a case series of 259 histologically confirmed breast cancer patients treated at Cancer Treatment Centers of America. Kaplan Meier method was used to calculate survival. Cox proportional hazard models were constructed to evaluate the prognostic effect of phase angle independent of stage at diagnosis and prior treatment history. Survival was calculated as the time interval between the date of first patient visit to the hospital and the date of death from any cause or date of last contact/last known to be alive.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 259 patients, 81 were newly diagnosed at our hospital while 178 had received prior treatment elsewhere. 56 had stage I disease at diagnosis, 110 had stage II, 46 had stage III and 34 had stage IV. The median age at diagnosis was 49 years (range 25 – 74 years). The median phase angle score was 5.6 (range = 1.5 – 8.9). Patients with phase angle <= 5.6 had a median survival of 23.1 months (95% CI: 14.2 to 31.9; n = 129), while those > 5.6 had 49.9 months (95% CI: 35.6 to 77.8; n = 130); the difference being statistically significant (p = 0.031). Multivariate Cox modeling, after adjusting for stage at diagnosis and prior treatment history found that every one unit increase in phase angle score was associated with a relative risk of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.68 to 0.99, P = 0.041). Stage at diagnosis (p = 0.006) and prior treatment history (p = 0.001) were also predictive of survival independent of each other and phase angle.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study demonstrates that BIA-derived phase angle is an independent prognostic indicator in patients with breast cancer. Nutritional interventions targeted at improving phase angle could potentially lead to an improved survival in patients with breast cancer.</p