Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Dear Sir,
Cachexia with its syndromic signs and symptoms is known to seriously affect the quality of life of cancer patients. Cachexia in cancer patients can halt the continuation of anti-cancer treatments, and thus reduce overall survival [1]. It is estimated that up to 20% of cancer patients die from consequences of malnutrition rather than from the tumor itself [2]. In lung cancer—the leading cause of cancer death worldwide [3]—we observe between 30 and 50% of patients at the time of cancer diagnosis to already fulfill the diagnostic criteria of disease-related malnutrition or cancer cachexia, according to recent consensus guidelines [1, 2, 4].
Being unfit for primary anti-cancer treatment delivers an enormous psychological burden and fateful consequences to these patients. Current clinical guidelines [1, 2, 4, 5] clearly recommend a multimodal approach for the “identification, prevention, and treatment of reversible elements”. However, to date, few clinical trials include combinations of separate treatment approaches. Moreover, in clinical practice, cachexia is frequently overlooked, and its prevalence and relevance are severely underestimated [6, 7]. Therefore, efficient treatment concepts against the onset and progression of cachexia are sorely needed but have yet to be established [1, 2]. Moreover, the currently perceived lack of success in treating cachexia may also be a reason for bespoke low clinical awareness.
But what if the current clinical understanding of cachexia does not reflect the true complexity of the underlying pathophysiology and therefore renders existing diagnostic approaches in clinical routine ineffective?
Cachexia in cancer patients has been described as a syndrome a long time ago [8]. While separate definitions of cachexia have been introduced for various patient categories and different chronic diseases [4, 9], they do overlap with definitions of malnutrition and sarcopenia [10,11,12]; recently, the disease-related form of malnutrition with chronic inflammation has been put on a level with cachexia in cancer patients [13]. In the current clinical routine, this precludes separating cachexia due to cancer from malnutrition due to other causes [10]. This clinical challenge seeds our project, which aims to detect cachexia-specific metabolic patterns to support differentiation from other forms of malnutrition.
Our European consortium was awarded research funding from the EraPerMED consortium [14] (LuCaPET project, grant number ERAPerMed_324, “Clinical decision support for predicting cachexia in cancer patients using hybrid PET/CT imaging”) to study the effectiveness of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) imaging in combination with advanced artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms to study the evolution of inter-organ metabolic relations and from this to predict the onset of cancer-induced cachexia in treatment-naive lung cancer patients [15, 16]. Within the LuCaPET project, we aim to derive organ-specific “metabolic fingerprints” from whole-body positron emission tomography/computed tomography (WB-PET/CT) images of lung cancer patients who are at risk of developing cachexia.
Our project comprises the collection and analysis of retrospective and prospective data of lung cancer patients from a European consortium of three clinical imaging sites. A key methodological component is the fully automated image analysis of WB-PET/CT data [17] to derive interorgan networks of lung cancer patients with and without cachexia [18, 19]. These interorgan relations may reveal novel and relevant metabolic patterns and possibly checkpoints that might become predictive in the diagnosis and treatment of cachexia in these patients.
AI systems have been shown to produce accurate and reliable diagnoses, prognoses, and treatment suggestions in medicine [20,21,22,23]. However, the opacity of most AI systems challenges trust in clinical decision-making, in particular, when clinicians are unable to explain predictions for individual patients due to AI-black boxing. Furthermore, when AI-generated predictions—such as that of cachexia—cannot be underwritten by normal clinical experience, it may challenge the usual patient–physician relationship. Therefore, our consortium includes experts in AI and ethics who will evaluate conditions that may justify the use of opaque AI output in medical decision-making [24]. We argue that within an evidence-based medicine framework, clinicians must have access to explanations of predictions to meet ethical commitments of shared decision-making. Therefore, an additional goal of our project is to examine sociologically how to make AI-driven clinical decision support models detect cachexia transparent and comprehensible for clinicians.
In conclusion, the overarching vision of the LuCaPET consortium is to describe lung cancer-induced cachexia as a targetable and treatable condition at the same time as lung cancer patients receive their diagnosis. Toward this goal, we are employing FDG-enhanced WB-PET/CT imaging and a fully automated organ segmentation analysis. We are currently testing whether resulting “metabolic patterns and checkpoints” revealed by the PET-driven decision support are predictive in the treatment of cancer cachexia and thus improve the quality of the patient’s life and survival. Sociological exploration of the role of clinical decision support algorithms in clinical practice aims to enhance their comprehensibility and hopefully open new avenues to controlling cachexia.
The LuCaPET consortium, 09 FEB 2024.
Data availability
Not applicable.
References
Arends J, Strasser F, Gonella S, Solheim TS, Madeddu C, Ravasco P, et al. Cancer cachexia in adult patients: ESMO clinical practice guidelines. ESMO Open. 2021;6(3):100092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100092.
Muscaritoli M, Arends J, Bachmann P, Baracos V, Barthelemy N, Bertz H, et al. ESPEN practical guideline: clinical nutrition in cancer. Clin Nutr. 2021;40(5):2898–913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2021.02.005.
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492.
Fearon K, Strasser F, Anker SD, Bosaeus I, Bruera E, Fainsinger RL, et al. Definition and classification of cancer cachexia: an international consensus. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(5):489–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70218-7.
Roeland EJ, Bohlke K, Baracos VE, Bruera E, Del Fabbro E, Dixon S, et al. Management of cancer cachexia: ASCO guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(21):2438–53. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.20.00611.
von Haehling S, Anker MS, Anker SD. Prevalence and clinical impact of cachexia in chronic illness in Europe, USA, and Japan: facts and numbers update 2016. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2016;7(5):507–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcsm.12167.
Poisson J, Martinez-Tapia C, Heitz D, Geiss R, Albrand G, Falandry C, et al. Prevalence and prognostic impact of cachexia among older patients with cancer: a nationwide cross-sectional survey (NutriAgeCancer). J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2021;12(6):1477–88. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcsm.12776.
Theologides A. Pathogenesis of cachexia in cancer. A review and a hypothesis. Cancer. 1972;29(2):484–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(197202)29:2%3c484::aid-cncr2820290238%3e3.0.co;2-e.
Evans WJ, Morley JE, Argiles J, Bales C, Baracos V, Guttridge D, et al. Cachexia: a new definition. Clin Nutr. 2008;27(6):793–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2008.06.013.
Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia M, Gonzalez MC, Fukushima R, Higashiguchi T, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition - a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019;38(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2018.08.002.
Vanhoutte G, van de Wiel M, Wouters K, Sels M, Bartolomeeussen L, De Keersmaecker S, et al. Cachexia in cancer: what is in the definition? BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2016;3(1):e000097. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2016-000097.
Gingrich A, Volkert D, Kiesswetter E, Thomanek M, Bach S, Sieber CC, et al. Prevalence and overlap of sarcopenia, frailty, cachexia and malnutrition in older medical inpatients. BMC Geriatr. 2019;19(1):120. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-019-1115-1.
Muscaritoli M, Imbimbo G, Jager-Wittenaar H, Cederholm T, Rothenberg E, di Girolamo FG, et al. Disease-related malnutrition with inflammation and cachexia. Clin Nutr. 2023;42(8):1475–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2023.05.013.
1: ‘ERA PerMed’: European research area network in the field of personalised medicine. https://erapermed.isciii.es. Accessed 22 Jan 2024.
1: LuCaPET (consortium's homepage). https://www.meduniwien.ac.at/lucapet/. Accessed 22 Jan 2024.
2: LuCaPET consortium (linkedin). https://at.linkedin.com/showcase/lucapet/. Accessed 22 Jan 2024.
Shiyam Sundar LK, Yu J, Muzik O, Kulterer OC, Fueger B, Kifjak D, et al. Fully automated, semantic segmentation of whole-body (18)F-FDG PET/CT images based on data-centric artificial intelligence. J Nucl Med. 2022;63(12):1941–8. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.122.264063.
Sundar LS, Abenavoli EM, Beyer T, Ferrara D, Gruenert S, Hacker M, et al. Metabolic fingerprinting: towards multiorgan PET-driven systemic analysis for early-stratification of lung cancer patients with and without cachexia. Eur J Nucl Med Mol I. 2022;49(Suppl 1):S224–5.
Frille A, Rullmann M, Hofmann L, Abenavoli E, Beyer T, Duke D, et al. Region-specific glucose metabolism in the brain predicts cachexia syndrome in patients with lung cancer. Nuklearmedizin. 2023;62(2):157. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1766362.
Elemento O, Leslie C, Lundin J, Tourassi G. Artificial intelligence in cancer research, diagnosis and therapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2021;21(12):747–52. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-021-00399-1.
Fitzgerald RC, Antoniou AC, Fruk L, Rosenfeld N. The future of early cancer detection. Nat Med. 2022;28(4):666–77. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-01746-x.
Dvijotham KD, Winkens J, Barsbey M, Ghaisas S, Stanforth R, Pawlowski N, et al. Enhancing the reliability and accuracy of AI-enabled diagnosis via complementarity-driven deferral to clinicians. Nat Med. 2023;29(7):1814–20. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-023-02437-x.
Ladbury C, Amini A, Govindarajan A, Mambetsariev I, Raz DJ, Massarelli E, et al. Integration of artificial intelligence in lung cancer: rise of the machine. Cell Rep Med. 2023;4(2):100933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrm.2023.100933.
Holm S. On the justified use of AI decision support in evidence-based medicine: validity, explainability, and responsibility. Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2023:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180123000294.
Funding
Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. D. Ferrara, J. Yu S. Duke, S. Gruenert, and L. Hofmann are supported by the ERAPERMED2021-324 “PETictCAC” (ERA PerMed is funded under the ERA-NET Cofund scheme of the Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Framework Programme of the European Commission Research Directorate-General, grant agreement no. 779282, which includes funding from the Austrian Science Fund, Innovation Fund Denmark, Regione Toscana, and the Saxon State Ministry for Science, Culture and Tourism).
A. Frille was supported by the postdoctoral fellowship “MetaRot program” (clinician scientist program) from the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), Germany (FKZ 01EO1501, IFB Adiposity Diseases); a research grant from the “Mitteldeutsche Gesellschaft für Pneumologie (MDGP) e.V.” (2018-MDGP-PA-002); a junior research grant from the Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig (934100–012); and a graduate fellowship from the “Novartis Foundation”.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Consortia
Contributions
The first draft of the manuscript was written by Armin Frille and Thomas Beyer, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval
Not applicable.
Consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent to publish
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Frille, A., Arends, J., Abenavoli, E.M. et al. “Metabolic fingerprints” of cachexia in lung cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 51, 2067–2069 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-024-06689-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-024-06689-8