The purpose of the study is to improve the nutritional status of esophageal cancer patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiotherapy by the personalized nutrition counseling.Dietitians consult with participants which invited to be the experimental group and follow up weekly through communication software (Line) or telephone remote methods. Dietitians provide the dietary advice base on the guidance of the cancer diet principles, and give on assessment and diet adjustments. At the same time, Under the same condition of nutritional supplements in both the experimental group and the control group, the investigators explore the changes in the quality of life and nutritional status of the subjects by evaluating with the nutrition Index (PG-SGA) and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire Taiwan version) questionnaire evaluation and recode the basic physical data, including body weight, grip strength, body muscle fat composition. Therefore, investigators conducted this study to appoint dietitian to arrange personalized nutrition consultation for esophageal cancer patients to improve the nutritional status of these patients.
Approximately 60-85% of esophageal cancer patients present with malnutrition at diagnosis (1). Malnutrition, defined as body weight loss of more than 10% over the previous 6 months is associated with treatment response and survival (2). Around 38% of esophageal cancer patients are managed with curative intent in the form of neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy followed by esophagectomy (3). Individuals are at increased risk of malnutrition arising from disease related symptoms and neoadjuvant treatment. Nutritional status serves as an important risk factor for major complications after operation (4) Therefore, assessment of nutritional status should be undertaken for all esophageal cancer patients, especially for those who are planned to receive esophagectomy (5). The nutritional assessment includes hand grip for muscle mass (6), body composition for lean body mass and sarcopenia (7), body mass index- body weight loss grade (BMI-BWL grade) for generalized nutrition status (8). These tools are needed to be integrated and individualized to esophageal cancer patients to improve outcome. Therefore, investigators conducted this trial to appoint dietitian to arrange personalized nutrition consultation for esophageal cancer patients to improve the nutritional status of these patients.
Study Type
OBSERVATIONAL
Enrollment
90
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital
New Taipei City, Taiwan
RECRUITINGBMI in kg/m^2-W1
Document of participant's BMI and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: baseline
BMI in kg/m^2-W2
Document of participant's BMI and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 2nd week
BMI in kg/m^2-W3
Document of participant's BMI and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 3rd week
BMI in kg/m^2-W4
Document of participant's BMI and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 4th week
BMI in kg/m^2-W5
Document of participant's BMI and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 5th week
BMI in kg/m^2-W6
Document of participant's BMI and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 6th week
BMI in kg/m^2-W12
Document of participant's BMI and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 12th week
BMI in kg/m^2-W18
Document of participant's BMI and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 18th week
BMI in kg/m^2-W30
Document of participant's BMI and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 30th week
hand grip in kg-W1
Document of participant's hand grip and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: baseline
hand grip in kg-W2
Document of participant's hand grip and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 2nd week
hand grip in kg-W3
Document of participant's hand grip and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 3rd week
hand grip in kg-W4
Document of participant's hand grip and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 4th week
hand grip in kg-W5
Document of participant's hand grip and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 5th week
hand grip in kg-W6
Document of participant's hand grip and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 6th week
hand grip in kg-W12
Document of participant's hand grip and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 12th week
hand grip in kg-W18
Document of participant's hand grip and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 18th week
hand grip in kg-W30
Document of participant's hand grip and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 30th week
body fat in kg-W1
Document of participant's body fat and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: baseline
body fat in kg-W2
Document of participant's hand grip and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 2nd week
body fat in kg-W3
Document of participant's body fat and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 3rd week
body fat in kg-W4
Document of participant's body fat and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 4th week
body fat in kg-W5
Document of participant's body fat and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 5th week
body fat in kg-W6
Document of participant's body fat and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 6th week
body fat in kg-W12
Document of participant's body fat and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 12th week
body fat in kg-W18
Document of participant's body fat and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 18th week
body fat in kg-W30
Document of participant's body fat and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 30th week
muscle weight in kg-W1
Document of participant's muscle weight and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: baseline
muscle weight in kg-W2
Document of participant's muscle weight and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 2nd week
muscle weight in kg-W3
Document of participant's muscle weight and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 3rd week
muscle weight in kg-W4
Document of participant's muscle weight and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 4th week
muscle weight in kg-W5
Document of participant's muscle weight and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 5th week
muscle weight in kg-W6
Document of participant's muscle weight and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 6th week
muscle weight in kg-W12
Document of participant's muscle weight and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 12th week
muscle weight in kg-W18
Document of participant's muscle weight and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 18th week
muscle weight in kg-W30
Document of participant's muscle weight and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 30th week
CTC cell number counting in number-W1
Document of participant's CTC cell number counting and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: baseline
CTC cell number counting in number-W6
Document of participant's CTC cell number counting and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 6th week
CTC cell number counting in number-W18
Document of participant's CTC cell number counting and evaluating the effectiveness of nutritionist health education nutritional status
Time frame: 18th week
Abridged Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment, aPG-SGA Questionnaire W1
nutrition consultation and do the SGA questionnaire(the minimum value is 1 and the maximum value is 36. The higher scores mean a worse outcome) for recoding and improving the nutritional status of participants.
Time frame: baseline
Abridged Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment, aPG-SGA Questionnaire W3
nutrition consultation and do the SGA questionnaire(the minimum value is 1 and the maximum value is 36. The higher scores mean a worse outcome) for recoding and improving the nutritional status of participants.
Time frame: 3th week
Abridged Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment, aPG-SGA Questionnaire W6
nutrition consultation and do the SGA questionnaire(the minimum value is 1 and the maximum value is 36. The higher scores mean a worse outcome) for recoding and improving the nutritional status of participants.
Time frame: 6th week
aPG SGA Questionnaire W18
nutrition consultation and do the SGA questionnaire(the minimum value is 1 and the maximum value is 36. The higher scores mean a worse outcome) for recoding and improving the nutritional status of participants.
Time frame: 18th week
SGA-Questionnaire W30
nutrition consultation and do the SGA questionnaire(the minimum value is 1 and the maximum value is 36. The higher scores mean a worse outcome) for recoding and improving the nutritional status of participants.
Time frame: 30th week
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.