LB092 - EFFECTS OF LEUCINE SUPPLEMENTATION ON BODY COMPOSITION AND FUNCTIONAL OUTCOMES IN OLDER ADULTS WITH GASTROINTESTINAL CANCER

LB092

EFFECTS OF LEUCINE SUPPLEMENTATION ON BODY COMPOSITION AND FUNCTIONAL OUTCOMES IN OLDER ADULTS WITH GASTROINTESTINAL CANCER

M. F. Andrade^1,*, J. F. De Resende¹, M. Seelaender¹, F. Formiga^2,3, R. Massai⁴

¹Cancer Metabolism Research Group, Department of Surgery and Laboratory of Experimental Surgery (LIM 26), Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, ²Department of Colorectal Surgery, Medical Science, Santa Casa de Misericórdia de São Paulo, ³Department of Colorectal Surgery, Heliópolis Hospital, ⁴Gastrointestinal Surgery, Instituto do Câncer Dr. Arnaldo Vieira de Carvalho, São Paulo, Brazil

Rationale: Cancer-associated muscle loss impairs functional capacity, quality of life, and clinical outcomes. Leucine supplementation may preserve muscle mass and function by stimulating muscle protein synthesis through mTOR activation.

Methods: This double-blind study included 20 patients with gastrointestinal cancer divided into two groups (A and B; n=10/group). Both groups were comparable regarding sex distribution (6 males and 4 females per group) and age (67.90±2.99 vs. 64.50±2.97 y, p>0.05). Data were assessed at baseline and after the intervention. Functional capacity was evaluated using the TUG test. Body composition was assessed using DXA. Variables were analyzed using Student’s T-test or the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.

Results: Group A showed significantly greater improvements than Group B in calf circumference (right calf: 0.98±0.26 vs. -0.12±0.19 cm, p=0.003; left calf: 0.72±0.25 vs. 0.01±0.23 cm, p=0.049). Functional performance also improved in Group A, with a greater reduction in TUG time (-1.11±0.62 vs.-0.26±0.49 s, p=0.035). DXA analysis demonstrated a significantly greater increase in appendicular lean mass in Group A compared with Group B (0.78±0.23 vs. 0.01±0.21 kg, p=0.032). Bone mineral content increased in Group A and decreased in Group B (56.17±25.89 vs.-30.14±15.13 g, p=0.038). No significant differences were observed for the remaining anthropometric and functional variables.

Conclusion: This study is presently ongoing, and the protocol remains blinded. The intervention in Group A promoted significant improvements in muscle-related anthropometric measures, functional mobility, appendicular lean mass, and bone mineral content compared with Group B. These findings suggest a beneficial effect of Supplement A on the preservation of musculoskeletal health in older adults with cancer.

Disclosure of Interest: None declared