This study aimed to determine the incidence rates of refeeding phenomena (defined as a decline in p-phosphate) and refeeding syndrome (RFS; defined as development of clinical symptoms in addition to a decline in p-phosphate) in head and neck cancer patients, and to identify risk factors. Fifty-four head and neck cancer patients referred for surgery were included. Forty-six potential risk factors were registered at the baseline, and p-phosphate was measured at Days 2, 4, and 7. Eleven patients (20%) developed RFS, and twenty-eight (52%) developed refeeding phenomena. At baseline, these patients presented a higher prevalence of head and neck pain, eating difficulties, higher p-phosphate levels, lower p-transferrin levels, and, in men, lower b-hemoglobin levels. Patients who developed symptoms had a decline in p-phosphate ≥0.22 mmol/l. At baseline, these patients had higher p-phosphate levels, higher alcohol consumption, and lower p-transferrin and p-sodium levels, as well as a higher prevalence of eating difficulties, low handgrip strength (HGS), and a history of radiation therapy. The risk factors most strongly associated with the development of refeeding phenomena and RFS were pain, eating difficulties, low HGS, high alcohol intake, and previous radiation therapy.

Head and neck cancer survivors frequently experience nutritional challenges, and proper rehabilitation should be offered. The trial objective was to test the effect of a multidisciplinary residential nutritional rehabilitation programme addressing physical, psychological, and social aspects of eating problems after treatment. In a randomized controlled trial, 71 head and neck cancer survivors recruited through a nationwide survey were randomized to the program or a wait-list control group. Inclusion was based on self-reported interest in participation. The primary outcome was change in body weight. Secondary outcomes included physical function, quality of life, and symptoms of anxiety and depression. Differences between groups at the 3-month follow-up were tested. No significant differences were seen in body weight change, but there were overall trends towards greater improvements in physical function (hand grip strength: p = 0.042; maximal mouth opening: p = 0.072) and quality of life (“Role functioning”: p = 0.041; “Speech problems”: p = 0.040; “Pain”: p = 0.048) in the intervention group. To conclude, a multidisciplinary residential nutritional rehabilitation program had no effect on body weight in head and neck cancer survivors with self-reported interest in participation, but it may have effect on physical function and quality of life. Further research on relevant outcomes, inclusion criteria, and the program’s effect in different subgroups is needed.

Introduction Nutritional challenges are common consequences of cancer, and they do not only occur in the hospital setting. They are also frequent after completion of treatment, and nutritional interventions in community-based post-treatment rehabilitation services are important. The first step towards initiating any nutritional intervention is to identify the individual in need hereof, but evidence is limited on the applicability of different nutrition screening and assessment tools in the post-treatment rehabilitation services. The aim is to systematically review and identify nutrition screening and assessment tools appropriate for use in patients with cancer and survivors of cancer in hospital or community-based healthcare settings. Methods and analysis In this systematic review, the electronic databases PubMed, CINAHL Complete and Embase were searched systematically using comprehensive search strategies. Primary searches were carried out in August 2018 with updated searches performed in November 2019. Clinicaltrials.gov and PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews will be searched for additional relevant studies. Studies will be included if they validate a nutrition screening or assessment tool in adult patients with cancer or survivors of cancer. No restriction on publication date will be applied, and full-text articles in English, Danish, Norwegian and Swedish are eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently conduct screening of search results, study selection, data extraction and quality assessment. Data will be synthesised narratively. Ethics and dissemination No ethical approval is required. Results will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and published in an international peer-reviewed journal. Furthermore, results will be presented in relevant research and clinical fora to facilitate transfer of results to clinical practice in benefit of patients. PROSPERO registration number CRD42018096678.