| Title |
Clinical Impact of Neoadjuvant Therapy on Nutritional Status in Pancreatic Cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Surgical Oncology, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1245/s10434-018-6699-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mitsuru Tashiro, Suguru Yamada, Fuminori Sonohara, Hideki Takami, Masaya Suenaga, Masamichi Hayashi, Yukiko Niwa, Chie Tanaka, Daisuke Kobayashi, Goro Nakayama, Masahiko Koike, Michitaka Fujiwara, Tsutomu Fujii, Yasuhiro Kodera |
| Abstract |
The association between neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) and nutritional status in pancreatic cancer (PC) is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of NAT on nutritional status. Overall, 161 patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for PC between August 2010 and March 2017 were enrolled and were divided into two groups: the neoadjuvant group (NAG; n = 67) and the control group (CG; n = 94). Based on relative dose intensity (RDI), patients in the NAG group were further divided into RDI ≥ 80% (n = 39) and RDI < 80% (n = 19). Changes in nutritional index, inflammatory index, and inflammation-based prognostic scores during NAT and the perioperative period were assessed. Retinol-binding protein, prealbumin, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, and prognostic nutrition index significantly worsened in the NAG after NAT (p = 0.007, p = 0.03, p = 0.04, p = 0.007, and p = 0.004, respectively). The recovery of rapid turnover proteins after postoperative day 5 was significantly worse in the NAG compared with the CG (p < 0.05), but tended to be more prompt in the RDI ≥ 80% group among the NAG. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and time to postoperative adjuvant therapy between the NAG and the CG. NAT for PC could aggravate nutritional status and hamper its postoperative recovery. Furthermore, malnutrition might decrease tolerance of NAT. These findings suggest the importance of nutritional support for patients with NAT in PC. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 29% |
| Mexico | 1 | 14% |
| Brazil | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Professor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 18 | 49% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 54% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 October 2018.
All research outputs
#7,326,749
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#2,539
of 6,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,762
of 331,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#92
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,550 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,118 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.