Malnutrition is associated with a greater risk of morbidity and mortality and lower tolerance to chemotherapy. Our purpose was to study the association between nutritional status and the efficiency and tolerance of immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Nutritional and oncological data were reported at 2 months (M2) and 4 months (M4) after the initiation of immunotherapy (M0). The influence of nutritional status at M0 was estimated with the efficacy and toxicity of immunotherapy at M2 to M4. In total, 127 patients were included in the study, and nutritional status was estimated at M0 for 120 patients: 67% were not malnourished, 20% presented with moderate malnutrition, and 13% presented with severe malnutrition. There was no significant link between the nutritional status at M0 and the toxicity of immunotherapy at M2 and M4. However, severe malnutrition was significantly associated with treatment efficacy at M2 (p = 0.04) and with a lower survival rate with an HR (Hazard Ratio) = 2.32–95% C.I: 1.13–4.75 (p = 0.02). Furthermore, a monthly decrease of 1% of the weight had an HR = 1.17–95% C.I: 1.13–1.21 (p = 0.0001). Severe malnutrition and weight loss are independent factors associated with lower survival. Studies integrating the systemic detection of sarcopenia with a closer nutritional follow-up could highlight an improvement in survival.

Background: Cachexia, characterized by involuntary muscle mass loss, negatively impacts survival outcomes, treatment tolerability, and functionality in cancer patients. However, there is a limited appreciation of the true prevalence of low muscle mass due to inconsistent diagnostic methods and limited oncologist awareness. Methods: Twenty-nine French healthcare establishments participated in this cross-sectional study, recruiting patients with those metastatic cancers most frequently encountered in routine practice (colon, breast, kidney, lung, prostate). The primary outcome was low skeletal muscle mass prevalence, as diagnosed by estimating the skeletal mass index (SMI) in the middle of the third-lumbar vertebrae (L3) level via computed tomography (CT). Other objectives included an evaluation of nutritional management, physical activity, and toxicities related to ongoing treatment. Results: Seven hundred sixty-six patients (49.9% males) were enrolled with a mean age of 65.0 years. Low muscle mass prevalence was 69.1%. Only one-third of patients with low skeletal muscle mass were receiving nutritional counselling and only 28.4% were under nutritional management (oral supplements, enteral or parenteral nutrition). Physicians highly underdiagnosed those patients identified with low skeletal muscle mass, as defined by the primary objective, by 74.3% and 44.9% in obese and non-obese patients, respectively. Multivariate analyses revealed a lower risk of low skeletal muscle mass for females (OR: 0.22, P < 0.01) and those without brain metastasis (OR: 0.34, P < 0.01). Low skeletal muscle mass patients were more likely to have delayed treatment administration due to toxicity (11.9% versus 6.8%, P = 0.04). Conclusions: There is a critical need to raise awareness of low skeletal muscle mass diagnosis among oncologists, and for improvements in nutritional management and physical therapies of cancer patients to curb potential cachexia. This calls for cross-disciplinary collaborations among oncologists, nutritionists, physiotherapists, and radiologists.

Background: Cabozantinib, a standard of care metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), may be associated with weight and muscle loss. These effects of new generation VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor on muscle mass loss are poorly described.Methods: All cabozantinib‐treated mRCC patients from January 2014 to February 2019 in our institution were included. Clinical data including weight were collected during therapy. Computed tomography images were centrally reviewed for response assessment, and axial sections at the third lumbar vertebrae were used to measure the total muscle area. Toxicities and cabozantinib outcomes were evaluated. Co‐primary endpoints included skeletal muscle loss and weight loss (WL), longitudinally evaluated during treatment. WL has been classified according to CTCAEv5.0: Grade 1 (loss of 5 to <10% of baseline body weight), Grade 2 (loss of 10% to 20% of baseline body weight).Results: Patients were mostly men (70.3%), median age was 59.2 (range: 22.0–78.0) years, and median baseline body mass index was 25.0 (range: 16.4–49.3) kg/cm². Prognosis according to International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium score was good, intermediate, and poor for 13 (13.0%), 63 (63.0%), and 24 (24.0%) patients, respectively. Out of a total of 120 patients, 101 patients with a median follow‐up of 22.3 months (range: 4.5–62.2) were eligible for analysis; 85 experienced muscle loss and muscle loss >10% increased during cabozantinib exposition, especially after 6 months of treatment. At cabozantinib baseline, 71 patients (70.3%) had sarcopenia, and 16/30 (53.3%) non‐sarcopenic patients developed sarcopenia during treatment. Baseline sarcopenia was associated with lower response rates (P = 0.031) and higher grades 3–4 toxicities (P = 0.001). Out of 92 patients included in the WL analysis, 44 (47.8%) and 12 (13.0%) experienced grades 2 and 3 WL, respectively.Conclusions: We report a high incidence of grades 3–4 WL, fourth times higher than reported in prior pivotal trials, and half of the patients developed sarcopenia while on cabozantinib treatment. Weight and muscle mass loss with cabozantinib are underreported and may require further investigations and early management.

Objectives: To assess how physicians and surgeons carried out malnutrition screening and follow-up for patients with lung cancer. Materials and methods: We carried out an expert opinion survey in France using an anonymous self-administered online questionnaire. Results: In 2017, 206 practitioners responded, of which 60.7% were pulmonologists, 17.4% thoracic surgeons, 11.2% oncologists, and 10.7% radiotherapists. At initial diagnosis, 79.3% of practitioners recorded patients’ percentage of weight loss. During follow-up examinations, 67.5% recorded this data for patients at risk of malnutrition and 70.4 % for malnourished patients. Food intake was evaluated by 21.7% of practitioners at initial diagnosis. Surgeons assessed percentage of weight loss and food intake significantly less often than pulmonologists did, they were less likely to request serum albumin tests and waited for a greater percentage of weight loss before referring patients to a nutrition professional. All practitioners were well aware of the prevalence of malnutrition among lung cancer patients and its consequences. The main factors preventing optimal nutritional assessment reported by practitioners were a lack of time and limited specialized knowledge. Conclusion: Nutritional assessment remained suboptimal, especially for surgical patients. The importance granted to malnutrition needs to be increased for patients with lung cancer, especially in surgical departments.