Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
The losses in taste and smell that occur with advancing age can lead to poor appetite, inappropriate food choices,
as well as decreased energy consumption. Decreased energy consumption can be associated with impaired
protein and micronutrient status and may induce subclinical de®ciencies that directly impact function. Most
nutritional interventions in the elderly do not compensate for taste and smell losses and complaints. For example,
cancer is a medical condition in which conventional nutritional interventions (that do not compensate for taste
and smell losses) are ineffective. Evidence is now emerging that suggests compensation for taste and smell losses
with ¯avor-enhanced food can improve palatability and=or intake, increase salivary ¯ow and immunity, reduce
chemosensory complaints in both healthy and sick elderly, and lessen the need for table salt.
Descriptors: aging; smell; taste; food intake; immunity
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2000) 54, Suppl 3, S54±S63
Elevated detection and recognition Various malignant neoplams Radiotherapy further impaired 35 Bolze et al (1982)
thresholds for NaCl (salty), sucrose taste loss
(sweet), HCl (sour) and urea (bitter)
prior to radiotherapy; salty, sweet, and
bitter further impaired by radiotherapy
Elevated recognition thresholds for Oropharyngeal cancers Radiotherapy 8 Conger (1973)
sucrose (sweet), HCl (sour), quinine
HCl (bitter) during radiotherapy;
recovery by 120 days
Elevated detection and recognition Head and neck Radiotherapy 13 Mossman & Henkin (1978)
thresholds especially for bitter and
salt thresholds during radiotherapy
Elevated NaCl (salty) recognition thresholds Breast and colon Prior to treatment 48 Carson & Gormican (1977)
Elevated recognition threshold for Lung Prior to therapy 30 Williams & Cohen (1978)
hydrochloric acid (sour); individual
differences in bitter and sweet threshold
changes
Elevated taste recognition thresholds for Oropharyngeal During and after radiotherapy 1 Kalmus & Farnsworth (1959)
NaCl, sucrose, quinine sulfate, picric
acid; thresholds returned to normal 6
weeks post-treatment
Thresholds for NaCl (salty), tartaric Oral squamous cell carcinoma Radiation and chemotherapy 41 Tomita & Osaki (1990)
acid (sour), sucrose (sweet), and
quinine (bitter) elevated by radiation
and chemotherapy; recovery was not
complete by 1 y
Elevated glucose recognition threshold Various malignant neoplasms During chemotherapy 36 Bruera et al (1984)
Signi®cant increase in electrical taste Lung, ovary, breast Increase in untreated patients; 51 Ovesen et al (1991)
detection threshold; no change in thresholds decreased only in
smell threshold patients who responded to
chemotherapy (after 2 ± 3 months)
Signi®cant decrease in recognition Gastrointestinal 30 Hall et al (1980)
threshold for urea (bitter)
Loss of ability to discriminate Melanoma During nine courses of Mulder et al (1983)
between different concentrations chemotherapy
of salt, sweet, sour, and bitter
Signi®cant reduction in smell Breast cancer Mixed sample (treated and untreated) 46 Lehrer et al (1985)
identi®cation in patients with
estrogen-receptor positive
breast cancer
be individual variability in the time course of recovery (if Impact of taste and smell losses on nutritional status in
any) with the duration of losses ranging from several weeks cancer
to 6 months or longer (Mossman et al, 1982; Conger, 1973; Diminished taste sensitivity in cancer patients has been
Ophir et al, 1988). associated with inadequate food intake and=or weight loss
The causes of altered psychophysical taste and smell (Williams & Cohen, 1978; Bolze et al, 1982; DeWys &
measurements in cancer are not well understood but meta- Walters, 1975; Ames et al, 1993). When food is perceived
bolic changes induced by the presence of a neoplasm as as unpalatable or aversive, patients often reduce the diver-
well as damage to the sensory receptors by therapies are sity of foods consumed and fail to eat enough to meet
likely involved. Radiation therapy and chemotherapy can nutritional requirements (Nielsen et al, 1980; Bernstein &
affect the turnover of taste and smell receptors as well as Bernstein, 1981). Inadequate intake results in weight loss
alter the anatomical integrity of the taste bud. Oral com- and malnutrition which can impair a patient's response to
plications of cancer such as infections (fungal, viral, cancer therapies and increase mortality (Nielsen et al,
bacterial), ulcers, drug-induced stomatitis, and dry mouth 1980; Trant et al, 1982).
may also play a role.
There are several causes of the food aversions reported Current nutritional treatments for cancer
by cancer patients given in Table 4. First, impaired taste Nutrient intake in cancer patients undergoing treatment or
and smell alter the sensations derived from food. Second, with advanced cancer is generally suboptimal, and this can
food aversions can be learned during the course of cancer exacerbate immune impairments. Taste aberrations are
when sensory properties of foods are associated with believed to be one of the main causes of malnutrition
gastrointestinal distress (eg nausea) of therapy (Andry- associated with cancer and its treatment (DeWys & Wal-
kowski & Otis, 1990; Bernstein & Bernstein, 1981). ters, 1975); yet most treatment regimens for cancer have
Learned aversions and decreased food preferences can not been concerned with these sensory disturbances. The
persist long after all symptoms of discomfort have sub- goals of nutritional intervention in cancer treatment are to
sided. Aversive conditioning has been shown in animal support nutritional status, immune function, body composi-
models to modify neural responses to taste stimuli (Chang tion, functional status, and quality of life (Ottery, 1995) and
& Scott, 1984). to prevent or attenuate cachexia during the stress of the
Food aversions and cravings Various malignant neoplasms Radiotherapy 147 Brewin (1982)
Reduced palatability of high- Various Treated and untreated 111 Vickers et al (1981)
protein foods, cereals, sweets
in patients with taste aversions
All food tasted nauseating, Oropharyngeal Developed during ®rst 1 Kalmus & Farnsworth (1959)
greasy or rancid; wine tasted two weeks of radio-
metallic; water tasted salty therapy
Patients developed aversions to Breast and lung Prior to and during 76 Mattes et al (1987)
sweets, meats, caffeinated chemotherapy
beverages, high fat and greasy
foods during therapy
Patients who reported food 28 types including breast, No difference between 133 Nielsen et al (1980)
aversions rated food samples colorectal, Hodgkin's, lung, patients treated or
of chocolate, ham, pork, roast lymphoma untreated with chemo-
beef and chicken as less pleasant therapy
Symptom of reduced appetite Various 50 DeWys & Walters (1975)
correlates with elevated recognition
threshold for sucrose (sweet); meat
aversion correlates with lowered
thresholds for urea (bitter)
Highly varied hedonic responses to Upper gastrointestinal; lung Patients on chemotherapy 62 Trant et al (1982)
beverages containing ®ve supra- had less distinct preference
threshold concentrations of citric for any of the 5 concen-
acid (in lemonade), NaCl (in unsalted trations of sucrose particularly
tomato juice), urea (in tonic water), high levels
and sucrose (in cherry drink); anorectics
preferred lower sweetness levels than
nonanorectics; yet sweet foods
constituted a greater percentage of
their daily caloric intake
Percentage of patients reporting taste Head and neck cancer During radiotherapy 74 Chencharick & Mossman (1983)
problems increased from 18% prior to
radiation to over 80% during the 5th
week of radiation; foods with abnormal
taste included high protein foods
(meat, eggs, dairy), fruits, vegetables,
sweet, breads, cereal, coffee, tea
Complaints of metallic, bitter, or decreased Breast, lung Chemotherapy-cisplatin 44 Rhodes et al (1994)
taste; distorted sweet taste; changes in
odor of food especially unpleasantness;
increased sensitivity to odors such as
perfumes and hospital odors
oncology treatment (Mercadante, 1998). Compensating for Moreover, no prospective studies of cancer patients
taste and smell problems is generally not considered. eating ¯avor enhanced foods have been done. Nutritional
Current methods for nutritional support may afford these interventions using total parenteral nutrition (TPN) and
patients a better, although not a longer life (Tchekmedyian, enteral nutrition in cancer treatment (which eliminate
1995; Ottery, 1995). most of the pleasurable taste and smell aspects of food)
Recommendations to cancer patients generally empha- are ineffective (Parkinson et al, 1987). A meta-analysis of
size eating a balanced and nutritious diet with adequate randomized clinical trials of addition of TPN to standard
calories in order to: (1) prevent weight loss; (2) tolerate treatment suggested that patients with metastatic cancers
therapy with fewer side effects; (3) maximize physical receiving TPN survived only 81% as long as patients who
condition to ®ght infection; (4) repair normal tissues received chemotherapy without TPN (see Chlebowski,
damaged by chemotherapy and radiation; (5) have energy 1989). These detrimental ®ndings may be due to several
to recover quickly; and (6) feel better (Aker & Lenssen, reasons including inadequacy of the formulation, failure to
1988; Morra et al, 1992). These recommendations are produce local intestinal stimulation, and deprivation of the
supported by the fact that there are no known bene®ts to taste and smell of foods (Mercadante, 1998). Enteral, like
cancer patients from prolonged wasting, and pretreatment parenteral, products may also suffer from inadequate for-
weight loss is a predictor of poor survival and response to mulation and chemosensory problems. They often have
therapy for cancer patients (Mercadante, 1998). Clinical unpleasant tastes and can cause esophageal re¯ux, espe-
data suggest that patients with an adequate dietary intake cially in bedridden patients.
during cancer treatment are better able to cope with the side
effects from chemotherapy, radiation therapy, immunother- Alternative nutritional interventions
apy, and surgery (Aker & Lenssen, 1988; Morra et al, Flavor enhancement of nutrient-dense table foods has the
1992). However, no well-controlled prospective studies of potential to compensate for taste and smell losses in cancer
nutrient intake using table foods have been performed to patients and perhaps improve food intake. Previous studies
assess the outcome of `eating a balanced nutritious diet'. in which the ¯avor of foods was intensi®ed for frail elderly