PUFA from fish oil appear to have anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidative effects and improve nutritional status in cancer patients. With this as background, the aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of EPA plus DHA on inflammatory condition, and oxidative and nutritional status in patients with lung cancer. In our multicentre, randomised, double-blind trial, thirty-three patients with a diagnosis of advanced inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer and undergoing chemotherapy were divided into two groups, receiving four capsules/d containing 510 mg of EPA and 340 mg of DHA, or 850 mg of placebo, for 66 d. At the start of chemotherapy (T₀), after 8 d (T₁), 22 d (T₂) and 66 d (T₃), biochemical (inflammatory and oxidative status parameters) and anthropometric parameters were measured in both groups. A significant increase of body weight in the n-3 group at T₃v. T₀ was observed. Concerning inflammation, C-reactive protein and IL-6 levels differed significantly between the n-3 and placebo groups at T₃, and progressively decreased during chemotherapy in the n-3 group, evidencing n-3 PUFA anti-inflammatory action. Concerning oxidative status, plasma reactive oxygen species levels increased in the placebo group v. the n-3 group at the later treatment times. Hydroxynonenal levels increased in the placebo group during the study, while they stabilised in the n-3 group. Our data confirm that the continual assumption of EPA plus DHA determined an anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidative action which could be considered a preliminary goal in anti-cachectic therapy.

Background/Objectives: Gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) is associated with clinically relevant changes in body composition, energy metabolism, and functional capacity in transgender and gender-diverse individuals. The nutritional implications of these adaptations remain insufficiently characterized, and current assessment models, largely derived from cisgender populations, may not fully capture hormone-related body composition and metabolic changes. This narrative review aims to synthesize the metabolic and body composition effects of GAHT, evaluate methodological limitations in assessing nutritional status, and propose an integrated framework for clinical nutritional management. Methods: A narrative literature review was conducted through searches of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, complemented by screening of relevant guidelines and reference lists. Priority was given to longitudinal studies, mechanistic studies, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and clinical guidance addressing GAHT-related changes in body composition, metabolism, nutritional status, and functional outcomes. Results: Available evidence suggests that GAHT is associated with sex steroid-related, tissue-specific changes in body composition and metabolism. In transgender men, testosterone is generally associated with increases in lean body mass (LBM), reductions in fat mass, and potential increases in visceral adiposity, alongside possible increases in energy expenditure and altered cardiometabolic profiles. In transgender women, estrogen therapy, combined with androgen suppression, is generally associated with reductions in LBM and redistribution of subcutaneous fat, with heterogeneous metabolic and functional responses. Across both groups, changes in body composition are not consistently reflected by the Body Mass Index or functional outcomes, suggesting a possible dissociation between structural and functional adaptation. Common assessment tools show limitations, including reliance on cisgender-derived reference standards and inability to capture dynamic hormonal transitions. Conclusions: Current evidence supports the need for a longitudinal and individualized interpretation of nutritional and body composition changes during GAHT. A shift toward longitudinal, multimodal nutritional assessment, integrating body composition, functional measures, biochemical markers, dietary intake, and clinical context, may improve clinical monitoring and reduce misclassification.

Background/Objectives: Nutrition research is expanding, yet translating evidence into routine care, public health, and policy remains challenging. Implementation science (IS) offers approaches to identify barriers and support the uptake of evidence-based interventions, but its application in nutrition and dietetics remains fragmented. This narrative review examines the application of IS across four areas: research, clinical practice, primary care and population health, and health systems and policy. Methods: Non-systematic searches of PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus focused primarily on publications from 2015 to 2026, with earlier foundational papers considered where relevant. Twenty publications were selected purposively for a qualitative synthesis of implementation determinants, strategies, frameworks and reported outcomes. Results: The literature identifies barriers at professional, organizational and system levels, including limited implementation skills, insufficient resources and challenges in adapting interventions to local contexts. Frameworks and theories such as CFIR, NPT and RE-AIM serve distinct purposes in assessing implementation determinants, understanding how practices become embedded and evaluating implementation outcomes. Evidence from reviews and individual studies suggests that implementation strategies may support the integration of nutrition care into clinical practice. However, the evidence base is heterogeneous and includes a substantial proportion of conceptual publications, with limited empirical evaluation across diverse settings. Examples from community programs and health systems illustrate the potential value of context assessment, stakeholder engagement and iterative adaptation. Evidence on long-term sustainability, equity and the implementation of precision nutrition remains limited. Conclusions: IS provides an approach to studying and supporting the integration of evidence into nutrition and dietetics practice. Strengthening implementation training, organizational support and context-sensitive evaluation may help improve the adoption and sustainability of interventions. Further research should assess patient and population outcomes, equity and scalability.