Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer 5/2024

Open Access 01.05.2024 | Research

Investigating oral somatosensory perception and oral symptoms of head and neck cancer patients: insights on eating behaviour

verfasst von: Reisya Rizki Riantiningtyas, Anestis Dougkas, Wender L. P. Bredie, Camille Kwiecien, Amandine Bruyas, Pierre Philouze, Agnès Giboreau, Florence Carrouel

Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Ausgabe 5/2024

Abstract

Purpose

Sensory alterations and oral manifestations are prevalent among head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. While taste and smell alterations have been thoroughly investigated, studies on their oral somatosensory perception remain limited. Building upon our previous publication that primarily focused on objective somatosensory measurements, the present work examined self-reported sensory perception, including somatosensation and oral symptoms, in HNC patients and evaluated their link with eating behaviour.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted using self-reported questionnaires on sensory perception, oral symptoms, sensory-related food preference, and eating behaviour among HNC patients (n = 30). Hierarchical clustering analysis was performed to categorise patients based on their sensory perception. Correlations between oral symptoms score, sensory perception, sensory-related food preference, and eating behaviour were explored.

Results

Two distinct sensory profiles of patients were identified: no alteration (n = 14) and alteration (n = 16) group. The alteration group showed decreased preference towards several sensory modalities, especially the somatosensory. Concerning eating behaviour, more patients in the alteration group agreed to negatively connotated statements (e.g. having food aversion and eating smaller portions), demonstrating greater eating difficulties. In addition, several oral symptoms related to salivary dysfunction were reported. These oral symptoms were correlated with sensory perception, sensory-related food preference, and eating behaviour.

Conclusion

This study presented evidence demonstrating that sensory alterations in HNC patients are not limited to taste and smell but cover somatosensory perception and are linked to various aspects of eating. Moreover, patients reported experiencing several oral symptoms. Those with sensory alterations and oral symptoms experienced more eating difficulties.
Hinweise

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00520-024-08512-4.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Introduction

Altered eating, or “losing the ability to eat well”, is a problem among cancer patients, including and especially among head and neck cancer (HNC) patients due to the cancer location being in the food ingestion site [13]. Several side effects were reported prior to, during, and following cancer treatments that interfere with their eating ability. These oral symptoms include dry mouth, chewing/swallowing difficulty, and mucositis [4, 5]. The symptom of dry mouth is reported by up to 90% of HNC patients following radiotherapy, which affects their ability to eat since a reduction in saliva alters the formation of the food bolus and makes swallowing difficult [5, 6]. Mucositis, experienced by 80–90% of HNC patients, induces pain and oral discomfort, which also affects their ability to eat [5, 7]. These oral symptoms lead to an alteration in eating habits that reduce food intake and may contribute to a decline in nutritional status [5, 8]. For instance, 51–74% of HNC patients were malnourished [2, 3]. It also adds a psychological burden as patients lose pleasure from eating and the social interactions surrounding mealtimes [9]. Consequently, this leads to a lowered quality of life [10].
Another aspect that contributed to the altered eating experience was the sensory aspect. Altered sensory perception plays a crucial role in cancer patients’ eating behaviour. Eating behaviour is a broad and complex term encompassing aspects of eating that can influence individuals’ nutritional choices. This includes food choices (preferences and avoidance), food intake, and eating experience [11]. It was shown that sensory alteration was correlated to lower energy intake and higher weight loss, contributing to declined nutritional status and quality of life of advanced HNC patients and patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumours [10, 12].
Several studies have investigated sensory alterations among HNC patients, focusing on alterations in smell and taste perception, with the prevalence ranging from 30 to 80% [13, 14]. However, sensory perception is not only limited to taste and smell but also somatosensation, which few studies have investigated [1, 15, 16]. Somatosensation comprises perception towards texture, temperature, and chemesthetic sensations (e.g. spiciness of chilli and cooling sensation of peppermint) processed by the trigeminal system [17]. In addition, overall food perception is highly dependent on the oral condition, such as salivary function and oral health status. For instance, it was shown that saliva influences the perception of food texture [18].
HNC patients reported oral complaints such as sensitivity to texture, sensitivity to spices, dry mouth, mucositis, and difficulty in chewing or swallowing [1, 15]. These oral complaints are related to somatosensory aspects and oral symptoms. HNC patients also reported that these changes have led to adjustments in their diets, such as adding sauce/gravy to add extra moisture to the food, blending the food, and avoiding certain foods with difficult textures (e.g. dry bread, red meat, hard vegetables) [16]. To better understand their eating experience, it is necessary to assess not only their taste and smell perception but also their somatosensory perception and oral symptoms. In contrast to the objective evaluation of somatosensation and salivary measures detailed in the previous part of our study [19], the present investigation delved into the self-reported sensory perception and oral symptoms of HNC patients, and their association with eating behaviour. It was hypothesised that sensory alterations among HNC consist not only of taste and smell alterations but also somatosensory alterations along with oral symptoms, altogether related to modified food preferences and eating behaviour.

Materials and methods

Study design

This questionnaire-based study was a part of the cross-sectional study (Somestalim study) registered to the Clinical Trials Registry (NCT05272917), conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The protocol and study design were approved by the Ethics Personal Protection Committee of Ile-de-France (RCB N° 2021-A02961-40). Informed consent was obtained from all participants. The Somestalim study is a cross-sectional study comparing HNC patients and matched control. The study consisted of objective measurements of salivary function and somatosensory sensitivity, as well as subjective measurements through self-reported questionnaires. The first part of the study, which focused on the objective measurements of the somatosensory perception of HNC patients compared to matched control, was reported in a previous publication by our group [19]. The present paper explores the subjective perception of HNC patients and its relationship with food preference and eating behaviour.

Participants

Clinical research associates or physicians recruited thirty HNC patients during their outpatient consultations at the Hospices Civils de Lyon (France). Patients were individuals aged 18–70 years who had been diagnosed with tumours in the upper aerodigestive tract (including the oral cavity, pharynx, and larynx), salivary glands, maxillary sinuses, or nasopharynx. Additionally, patients have completed radiotherapy between 4 months and 5 years ago, as a standalone treatment or in combination with surgery and/or systemic treatment. Exclusion criteria were pregnant or breastfeeding individuals, having food allergy or intolerance, unable to swallow soft food, having restricted mouth opening (trismus), having difficulties extending the tongue, and having large tongue resection [19]

Procedure

The study was conducted at Croix Rousse and Lyon-Sud hospitals from May 2022 to April 2023 (between 10.00 and 14.00). The exact time and location depended on the participant’s availability. Participants completed the questionnaires using a tablet, and data was collected via an online platform, Qualtrics (Provo, USA). The researcher was present to address any clarifying inquiries. The questionnaires took approximately 20 min to complete.
The self-reported questionnaires (Supplementary material S1) were developed specifically for the study and adapted from existing questionnaires [10, 2024]. The questionnaire was developed in English and translated into French. Native speakers checked and verified the translations with the English questionnaire. The questionnaires were pilot-tested with healthy individuals (internal staff of the Institut Lyfe Research Centre) (n = 16) and cancer patients (n = 4) to ensure clarity. Following this step, the comments of the testers were considered, and the research team validated the final questionnaire.
The questionnaire included questions on sociodemographic (sex, age, country of residence). Furthermore, questions on sensory perception and sensory-related food preference [10, 2022], oral symptoms [24], and eating behaviour [23] were included. The different parts of the questionnaires were as follows:
1.
Sensory perception: The question started with a general question on taste: “I notice changes in the taste of food/drinks” with response options “1 = strongly disagree” to “6 = strongly agree”, followed by the individual evaluation on the different sensory modalities. Fourteen items covered five subsections including the basic tastes, smell, texture, temperature, and chemesthetic sensations. The questions were phrased as follows: “Compared to the situation before cancer treatment, I perceive that my sensitivity towards [salty/ sweet/ sour/ bitter/ umami/ smell of/ texture of/ cold/ hot/ pungent/ cooling/ astringent/ carbonated/ alcoholic] food/drink …”. The response options were: “has decreased/ remains unchanged/ has increased”, except for smell in which the response options were “has decreased/ remains unchanged/ has increased/ is different” and texture limited to “changed/ remains unchanged”.
 
2.
Sensory-related food preference: Similar to the questions on sensory perception, the nine questions for sensory preference were phrased “In comparison with the situation before cancer treatment, my preference towards [sensory modality] food/ drink has..”. The response options were: “has decreased/ remains unchanged/ has increased”.
 
3.
Eating behaviour: 15 statements related to eating behaviour with response options of “1 = disagree completely” to “6 = agree completely”.
 
4.
Oral symptoms: 19 different oral symptoms with response options ranging from “1 = Never” to “5 = Always”.
 

Data analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to describe the sociodemographic and clinical information of the participants. In order to explore the various sensory profiles of the patients, a clustering analysis was conducted based on their responses to sensory perception. The analysis involved two-way hierarchical clustering using Ward’s method, and the resulting heatmap was created using the pheatmap package (R package version 1.0.12) in R studio (version 4.3.1) and the code was registered in GitHub repository [25]. Chi-square test was used to compare the categorical data between the groups.
To investigate the relationship between oral symptoms and other variables, the scores for each of the 19 individual oral symptoms were added to create an oral symptom score. Sensory-related food preference was treated as a categorical variable with three levels: decreased, no change, and increased preference. Correlations between oral symptoms score, sensory perception, sensory-related food preference, and eating behaviour were assessed using the Spearman correlations. A p-value of ≤ 0.05 was considered significant. SPSS Statistics 23 (IBM Corporation) was used for statistical analyses.

Results

Characteristics of the study population

The complete demographic and clinical characteristics of patients are presented in Table 1. In total, 30 patients (23 males and 7 females, mean age 59.9 ± 7.5) diagnosed with tumour on the oropharynx, hypopharynx, nasopharynx, larynx, or oral cavity participated in the study. All patients received radiotherapy; 70% had surgery, and 47% had chemotherapy.
Table 1
Demographic and clinical characteristics of patientsa [19]
Variable
Patient (n = 30)
Age (mean ± SD)
59.9 ± 7.5
Sex
  Male
23 (77)
  Female
7 (23)
Household
  Alone
6 (20)
  Living with partner/children
23 (7)
  Other
1 (3)
Smoking status
  Current smoker
6 (20)
  Former smoker
4 (13)
  Non-smoker
20 (67)
Alcohol consumption
   ≥ 4 × /week
3 (10)
  2–3 × /week
9 (30)
  2–4 × /month
7 (23)
   ≤ 1 × /month
3 (10)
  Never
8 (27)
Clinical characteristics
Primary tumour site
  Oropharynx
17 (57)
  Hypopharynx
2 (7)
  Nasopharynx
2 (7)
  Oral cavity
6 (20)
  Larynx
3 (10)
Histologic type
  Squamous cell carcinoma
26 (87)
  Other
4 (13)
Tumour stage
  I
0 (0)
  II
3 (10)
  III
13 (43)
  Iva
9 (30)
  IVb
2 (7)
  N/a
3 (10)
Types of treatment
  Radiation
2 (7)
  Radiation + surgery
14 (47)
  Radiation + surgery + systemic treatment
7 (23)
  Radiation + systemic treatment
7 (23)
Duration since the end of radiotherapy
   < 1 year
11 (37)
   > 1 year
19 (63)
aThe sum of percentages may be dissimilar to 100% due to rounding

Sensory alterations among head and neck cancer patients

Patient clustering based on perceived sensory alterations

Hierarchical clustering allows patients to be classified based on their response to 14 items of the sensory perception questions (the “Procedure” section, questionnaire 1). Figure 1 illustrates that two distinct clusters were identified: (1) group of patients who did not perceive any alterations or perceived few alteration across the different sensory modalities (n = 14), hereafter mentioned as the “no alteration group” and (2) a group of patients with perceived alteration in several sensory modalities (n = 16), hereafter mentioned as the “alteration group”. Within the alteration group, some patients experienced increased sensitivity, decreased sensitivity, and a mixture of increased and decreased sensitivity across the different sensory modalities. The distribution of patients with/without chemotherapy (p = 0.509) and duration since radiotherapy (p = 0.150) did not differ between the two groups.

Relationship between perceived sensory alteration and food preference

Based on the clustering, the two groups were first compared regarding their sensory-related food preference. Patients in the alteration group demonstrated significant differences in their sensory-related food preference compared to the no-alteration group (Table 2).
Table 2
Distribution of responses between groups in terms of sensory-related food preference
 
No alteration (n = 14)
Alteration (n = 16)
p-value
Salty food products
  Decreased preference
1
2
0.310
  No change
10
7
 
  Increased preference
3
7
 
Sweet food products
  Decreased preference
2
6
0.152
  No change
11
7
 
  Increased preference
1
3
 
Sour food products
  Decreased preference
1a
8b
0.011
  No change
13a
8b
 
  Increased preference
0a
0a
 
Bitter food products
  Decreased preference
1a
8b
0.028
  No change
12a
8b
 
  Increased preference
1a
0a
 
Spicy food products
  Decreased preference
0a
9b
< 0.001
  No change
14a
5b
 
  Increased preference
0a
2a
 
Cooling food products
  Decreased preference
0a
7b
0.013
  No change
13a
9b
 
  Increased preference
1a
0a
 
Astringent food products
  Decreased preference
3a
12b
0.003
  No change
11a
4b
 
  Increased preference
0a
0
 
Carbonated beverages
  Decreased preference
1a
6b
0.007
  No change
13a
6b
 
  Increased preference
0a
4b
 
Alcohol
  Decreased preference
3a
10b
0.024
  No change
11a
6b
 
  Increased preference
0a
0a
 
The different subscript letters denote a significant difference between columns at the 0.05 level on the chi-square test. The significant p-values are emphasised in bold
While most patients in the no alteration group reported an unchanged preference compared to before their treatment, the alteration group showed a higher frequency of patients with a decreased preference towards sour (p = 0.011) and bitter (p = 0.028) tastes. For the alteration group, half of the patients reported a decreased preference for sour and bitter food, yet only one patient from the no alteration group reported a decreased preference. In addition, the two groups also significantly differed in their preference towards all somatosensory sub-modalities. More patients in the alteration group reported a decreased preference for spicy, cooling and astringent food products, as well as carbonated and alcoholic beverages.

Relationship between perceived sensory alteration and eating behaviour

Some differences between the two groups were also observed in their responses towards eating behaviour questions (Table 3). Higher proportions of patients agreed to negatively-connotated items such as eating smaller portions (p = 0.012), eating becomes effortful (p = 0.002), food aversion (p = 0.006), and certain food has become unpleasant/difficult to eat (p = 0.035).
Table 3
Distribution of responses between groups in terms of eating behaviour
Statements
No alteration group (n = 14)
Alteration group (n = 16)
p-value
Feeling hunger when smelling/seeing food
  Disagree
0a
5b
0.031
  Agree
14a
11b
 
Eating a variety of food
  Disagree
3
8
0.107
  Agree
11
8
 
Trying novel food
  Disagree
2
6
0.154
  Agree
12
10
 
Having less appetite
  Disagree
8
8
0.491
  Agree
6
6
 
Feeling satiated quickly
  Disagree
7
9
0.509
  Agree
7
7
 
Eating smaller portion
  Disagree
11a
5b
0.012
  Agree
3a
11b
 
Eating more frequently
  Disagree
9
11
0.550
  Agree
5
5
 
Eating becomes demanding/effortful
  Disagree
11a
4b
0.002
  Agree
3a
12b
 
Losing eating pleasure
  Disagree
10
7
0.123
  Agree
4
9
 
Not feeling at ease when eating out
  Disagree
12
10
0.154
  Agree
2
6
 
Being the last to finish meal
  Disagree
4
5
0.596
  Agree
10
11
 
Disliking food before tasting
  Disagree
10
10
0.450
  Agree
4
6
 
Having food aversion
  Disagree
13a
7b
0.006
  Agree
1a
9b
 
Having food craving
  Disagree
6
8
0.491
  Agree
8
8
 
Certain food has become unpleasant
  Disagree
9a
4b
0.035
  Agree
5a
12b
 
The different subscript letters denote a significant difference between columns at the 0.05 level on the chi-square test. The significant p-values are emphasised in bold

Oral symptoms of head and neck cancer patients

Oral symptoms frequently experienced by more than 50% of the patients include dry mouth (80%), difficulty swallowing (67%), sticky saliva (60%), difficulty chewing (57%), food stuck in the throat (57%), and food stuck in the mouth (53%) (Table 4). Other oral symptoms that were frequently experienced were dental problems, sensitive teeth/gum, and pain in the throat.
Table 4
Reported oral symptoms, n (%)
Oral symptoms
Never
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Always
Subtotala
Dry mouth
1 (3)
5 (17)
6 (20)
11 (37)
7 (23)
24 (80)
Difficulty swallowing
7 (23)
3 (10)
10 (33)
8 (27)
2 (7)
20 (67)
Sticky saliva
8 (27)
4 (13)
6 (20)
8 (27)
4 (13)
18 (60)
Difficulty chewing
6 (20)
7 (23)
9 (30)
6 (20)
2 (7)
17 (57)
Food stuck in the throat
11 (37)
2 (7)
10 (33)
6 (20)
1 (3)
17 (57)
Food stuck in the mouth
11 (37)
3 (10)
10 (33)
4 (7)
2 (7)
16 (53)
Avoiding certain food due to dental problem
16 (53)
1 (3)
8 (27)
1 (3)
2 (7)
13 (43)
Sensitive teeth/gum
11 (37)
6 (20)
3 (10)
7 (23)
3 (10)
13 (43)
Pain in throat
14 (47)
3 (10)
6 (20)
6 (20)
1 (3)
13 (43)
Pain/problem with teeth
17 (57)
0 (0)
5 (17)
6 (20)
2 (7)
13 (43)
Fear of eating due to pain
18 (60)
2 (7)
5 (17)
3 (10)
2 (7)
10 (33)
Painful mouth
18 (60)
3 (10)
4 (7)
3 (10)
2 (7)
9 (30)
Oral inflammation
12 (40)
9 (30)
9 (30)
0 (0)
0 (0)
9 (30)
Pain in gum
17 (57)
5 (17)
5 (17)
2 (7)
1 (3)
8 (27)
Trismus
18 (60)
5 (17)
4 (7)
1 (3)
2 (7)
7 (23)
Burning sensation in the mouth
19 (63)
4 (7)
2 (7)
2 (7)
3 (10)
7 (23)
Bleeding gum
21 (70)
4 (7)
4 (7)
1 (3)
0 (0)
5 (17)
Painful lips
22 (73)
3 (10)
3 (10)
1 (3)
1 (3)
5 (17)
Nausea
18 (60)
7 (23)
4 (7)
1 (3)
0 (0)
5 (17)
aSubtotal to the frequency of sometimes, often, and always for each symptom
Correlations between oral symptom score and other variables, including sensory perception, sensory-related food preference, and eating behaviour, were explored (Supplementary Figs. 1, 2 and 3). Oral symptom scores showed moderate positive correlations with changes in texture (r = 0.54, p = 0.002) and temperature (r = 0.56, p = 0.001 for hot and r = 0.42, p = 0.021 for cold) perception. In particular, these changes in perception were correlated to oral symptoms such as difficulty in chewing and swallowing, sensitive teeth/gums, and pain surrounding the oral cavity.
The oral symptom score also showed negative correlations with a preference towards sour (r =  − 0.51, p = 0.004), spicy (r =  − 0.51, p = 0.004), carbonated (r =  − 0.45, p = 0.012), and astringent (r =  − 0.46, p = 0.012) food products, and alcohol (r =  − 0.39, p = 0.036). In particular, this decline in preference was correlated with oral symptoms such as difficulty swallowing, food getting stuck in the throat/mouth, dry mouth, oral inflammation, and pain surrounding the oral cavity.
Regarding eating behaviour, the oral symptom score was negatively correlated with consuming a variety of foods (r =  − 0.48, p = 0.007), in particular, driven by difficulty swallowing, food stuck in the throat, and pain surrounding the oral cavity. Meanwhile, oral symptom score was positively correlated with having less appetite (r = 0.42, p = 0.002), eating smaller portions (r = 0.49, p = 0.006), effortful eating (r = 0.54, p = 0.002), losing pleasure in eating (r = 0.43, p = 0.019), feeling discomfort when eating out (r = 0.53, p = 0.002), not liking food before tasting (r = 0.44, p = 0.015), developing food aversion (r = 0.66, p < 0.001), and food becoming unpleasant or difficult to eat (r = 0.65, p < 0.001).

Discussion

More than half of the HNC patients in this study reported experiencing sensory alterations, which is in agreement with the prevalence of self-reported sensory alteration ranging between 12 and 84% among various cancer patients [11]. Among these HNC patients, changes in taste and somatosensory perception (texture, temperature, and chemesthesis) were reported more frequently than changes in smell perception (Fig. 1), which is consistent with earlier observations [26]. A study showed that changes in smell perception tend to be gradual and unnoticed compared to taste perception [27].
The study highlights the relationship between sensory alteration, sensory-related food preference, and eating behaviour. Upon categorising the patients into two distinct profiles, the alteration group demonstrated a higher proportion of patients with a reduced preference for all somatosensory sub-modalities as well as towards bitter and sour tastes. These findings suggest that changes in sensory perception are linked with sensory-related food preferences. Similar observations have been reported in previous studies [20, 28]. Among patients receiving anti-tumour therapy, significant differences in product preferences of various oral nutritional supplements (ONS) were observed in the patient group with altered perception but not in the unaltered perception group [21]. Among testicular cancer patients, taste and smell sensitivity was associated with liking of ONS [28]. Further, previous studies showed that sensory alteration was related to reduced appetite, food appreciation, and food selection or intake [2931].
The presence of sensory alteration was also reflected in items concerning eating behaviour. A higher proportion of patients with sensory alteration agreed to the negatively connotated statements compared to the no alteration group. The HNC patients in the alteration group experienced more eating difficulties such as eating in smaller portions, having food aversion, and having difficulty eating certain foods. This may consequently lead to lower food intake, as it was shown that sensory alterations were correlated with a negative impact on nutritional status [5, 10].
The present study demonstrated that HNC patients experienced several oral symptoms. The oral symptoms frequently experienced by patients were dry mouth, sticky saliva, difficulty chewing, difficulty swallowing, food stuck in the mouth, and food stuck in the throat. These symptoms seem to be mediated by the lack of salivation, as observed in our previous publication [19]. The perception of dry mouth and sticky saliva were experienced by 80% and 60% of patients, respectively. The prevalence of dry mouth and thick saliva among HNC patients who have completed radiotherapy in previous studies was approximately 90% [5, 32]. The prevalence was higher in previous studies as they were assessed at the end of their radiotherapy, whereas in this study patients were included 4 months to 5 years after the end of their radiotherapy. Xerostomia, defined as the subjective perception of dry mouth and/or sticky saliva due to reduced salivary flow, has been widely reported to be one of the most common side effects in this subpopulation of cancer [33].
Difficulty in swallowing and chewing were experienced by 67% and 57% of patients, respectively. Saliva is responsible for bolus formation during mastication, in “wetting and coating, hydration, and granulation” [34]. Lack of saliva will cause the food to be more compact and cohesive, making it more difficult to chew [35, 36]. In addition to salivation, difficulty in chewing may be influenced by age, jaw muscle activity, and use of dentures [35]. Following mastication, the bolus needs to be optimally moistened before it can be swallowed; hence, sufficient saliva is also necessary to facilitate swallowing [34, 37]. Previous studies have shown that difficulty in food processing is common among HNC patients post-radiotherapy, ranging from 88 to 90% for swallowing difficulty and 40 to 63% for chewing difficulty [5, 32, 38]. These altogether may lead to fear of eating due to the risk of choking [39].
Food sticking in the throat and mouth was experienced by 57% and 53% of patients, respectively. These, too, can be associated with salivary function. The hydrating and lubricating properties of saliva facilitate oral clearance [40]; therefore, the lack of it causes food to get stuck in the mouth and/or throat. The other oral symptoms that the HNC patients in this study frequently experienced were dental problems, sensitive teeth/gum, pain in the throat, and pain/problems with teeth. These symptoms can be related to salivary function, as saliva protects teeth and oro-oesophageal mucosa [40]. It was shown that pain surrounding the oral cavity was one of the symptoms reported by HNC patients associated with cancer treatments such as radiotherapy and chemotherapy [4, 5]. Further, it was suggested that severe oral symptoms may influence patients’ physical functioning, quality of life, and nutritional status [41].
The correlation between oral symptoms and sensory perception was observed. Oral symptoms, such as difficulty in chewing and swallowing, food getting stuck in the mouth, and pain in the oral cavity, were positively correlated with texture and temperature perception. It implies that patients affected by these oral symptoms exhibit increased awareness or caution when selecting foods, aiming to avoid food textures and temperatures that may cause pain or discomfort upon consumption.
In addition to the aforementioned oral symptoms, dry mouth, and oral inflammation were also correlated to the preference for sourness, spiciness, astringency, carbonation, and alcohol. Saliva serves multiple functions, including sensory perception, food oral processing, and digestion [39]; hence, impairment in salivary production may influence their eating experience and food intake. A previous study demonstrated that salivary quantity was related to the perception of oral comfort, depending on the food products. The food needs enough moisture, or compensated with some fat, to be easily processed and ingested [42]. The amount and composition of saliva influence the perception of food texture [43]. Further, the interaction between salivary protein and polyphenols influenced the perception of astringency [44, 45], whereas spiciness will become an irritating sensation with the presence of oral pain and inflammation.
Finally, the correlations between oral symptoms and eating behaviour also demonstrated that patients with more oral symptoms have more difficulty in eating situations. Notably, patients with more oral symptoms were correlated with having less appetite, eating smaller portions, not feeling at ease when eating out, not liking food before tasting, developing food aversion, and making certain foods unpleasant or difficult to eat. Consequently, it was reported in previous studies that patients with more serious oral symptoms had reduced intake and higher weight loss [4, 5]. Therefore, both sensory alterations and oral symptoms may affect patients’ eating experience, contributing to adverse nutritional and health outcomes.
Prior research has identified discrepancies between objective and self-reported measurements of sensory alterations. In particular, self-reported taste alterations tend to be overestimated, whereas subjective smell alterations tend to be underestimated [13, 14]. Relying solely on objective measurements may underestimate the complex and subjective nature of the eating experience. Patients reported altered somatosensory perception, consistent with altered somatosensory measures observed previously [19]. However, it is important to note that the results obtained from these two measurements cannot be directly compared. The objective measurements captured the current situation, while the self-reported sensory perception was captured in a retrospective manner (i.e. “in comparison to before the cancer treatment, my sensitivity has”).
This study has limitations, including its small sample size and cross-sectional design; therefore, it cannot infer causation. As the sensory perception was based on retrospective response, it would have higher validity if conducted in a longitudinal design comparing the perception before the cancer treatments and a few time points following the treatments. Moreover, data on oral health status (e.g. number of teeth, occlusal functional units) and use of palliative care (e.g. artificial saliva), which may influence food perception and eating behaviour, was not assessed. However, the study still indicates that patients perceived somatosensory alteration, together with adverse oral symptoms, as being related to greater eating difficulties, which can potentially lead to deteriorated nutritional outcomes.

Conclusions

Eating is a fundamental act that not only fulfills physiological needs but also carries psychological value. The primary findings of the present study showed that more than half of the HNC patients perceived sensory alterations, including their somatosensory perception. These alterations were associated with different aspects of eating including sensory-related food preference and eating behaviour. In addition, common oral symptoms related to salivary dysfunction were reported by patients, which also influenced their eating experience. Patients with perceived sensory alterations and oral symptoms were more likely to face challenges in eating. In order to develop holistic nutritional interventions that enhance patients’ eating experience, it is necessary to consider these two aspects.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Dr. Elife Eker and Dr. Ariane Lapierre (radiotherapy service, Hospices Civils de Lyon), Mélanie Roche, David Dayde, Justine Dubreuil, and Eloise Aubret for their support in the recruitment of the patients as well as Alexandre Valenti, Justine Prigent, and Mélinda Cherruault-Anouge for their assistance in the data collection.

Declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.
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/​.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Kombi-Abonnement

Jetzt e.Med zum Sonderpreis bestellen!

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

Jetzt bestellen und 100 € sparen!

Anhänge

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Literatur
6.
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Gunn L, Gilbert J, Nenclares P et al (2021) Taste dysfunction following radiotherapy to the head and neck: a systematic review. Radiother Oncol 157:130–140CrossRefPubMed Gunn L, Gilbert J, Nenclares P et al (2021) Taste dysfunction following radiotherapy to the head and neck: a systematic review. Radiother Oncol 157:130–140CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Álvarez-Camacho M, Gonella S, Campbell S et al (2017) A systematic review of smell alterations after radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Cancer Treat Rev 54:110–121CrossRefPubMed Álvarez-Camacho M, Gonella S, Campbell S et al (2017) A systematic review of smell alterations after radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Cancer Treat Rev 54:110–121CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat McLaughlin L, Mahon SM (2014) Taste dysfunction and eating behaviors in survivors of head and neck cancer treatment. Medsurg Nurs 23:165–184 McLaughlin L, Mahon SM (2014) Taste dysfunction and eating behaviors in survivors of head and neck cancer treatment. Medsurg Nurs 23:165–184
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Galaniha LT, Nolden AA (2023) Characteristics and extent of taste alterations in cancer patients during and after treatments and potential taste alteration management strategies. In: Pangborn Sensory Science Sympsosium. 20–24 August 2023. Nantes, France Galaniha LT, Nolden AA (2023) Characteristics and extent of taste alterations in cancer patients during and after treatments and potential taste alteration management strategies. In: Pangborn Sensory Science Sympsosium. 20–24 August 2023. Nantes, France
35.
Zurück zum Zitat van der Bilt A (2012) Oral management of food. In: Chen J, Engelen L (eds) Food oral processing: fundamentals of eating and sensory perception. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, pp 63–93 van der Bilt A (2012) Oral management of food. In: Chen J, Engelen L (eds) Food oral processing: fundamentals of eating and sensory perception. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, pp 63–93
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Pedersen AML, Sørensen CE, Proctor GB, Carpenter GH (2018) Salivary functions in mastication, taste and textural perception, swallowing and initial digestion. Oral Dis 24:1399–1416CrossRefPubMed Pedersen AML, Sørensen CE, Proctor GB, Carpenter GH (2018) Salivary functions in mastication, taste and textural perception, swallowing and initial digestion. Oral Dis 24:1399–1416CrossRefPubMed
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Pedersen AM, Bardow A, Jensen SB, Nauntofte B (2002) Saliva and gastrointestinal functions of taste, mastication, swallowing and digestion. Oral Dis 8:117–129CrossRefPubMed Pedersen AM, Bardow A, Jensen SB, Nauntofte B (2002) Saliva and gastrointestinal functions of taste, mastication, swallowing and digestion. Oral Dis 8:117–129CrossRefPubMed
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Crowder SL, Douglas KG, Yanina Pepino M et al (2018) Nutrition impact symptoms and associated outcomes in post-chemoradiotherapy head and neck cancer survivors: a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv 12:479–494CrossRefPubMed Crowder SL, Douglas KG, Yanina Pepino M et al (2018) Nutrition impact symptoms and associated outcomes in post-chemoradiotherapy head and neck cancer survivors: a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv 12:479–494CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Investigating oral somatosensory perception and oral symptoms of head and neck cancer patients: insights on eating behaviour
verfasst von
Reisya Rizki Riantiningtyas
Anestis Dougkas
Wender L. P. Bredie
Camille Kwiecien
Amandine Bruyas
Pierre Philouze
Agnès Giboreau
Florence Carrouel
Publikationsdatum
01.05.2024
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Ausgabe 5/2024
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-024-08512-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2024

Supportive Care in Cancer 5/2024 Zur Ausgabe

Mehr Brustkrebs, aber weniger andere gynäkologische Tumoren mit Levonorgestrel-IUS

04.06.2024 Levonorgestrel Nachrichten

Unter Frauen, die ein Levonorgestrel-freisetzendes intrauterines System (IUS) verwenden, ist die Brustkrebsrate um 13% erhöht. Dafür kommt es deutlich seltener zu Endometrium-, Zervix- und Ovarialkarzinomen.

Bei seelischem Stress sind Checkpoint-Hemmer weniger wirksam

03.06.2024 NSCLC Nachrichten

Wie stark Menschen mit fortgeschrittenem NSCLC von einer Therapie mit Immun-Checkpoint-Hemmern profitieren, hängt offenbar auch davon ab, wie sehr die Diagnose ihre psychische Verfassung erschüttert

Antikörper mobilisiert Neutrophile gegen Krebs

03.06.2024 Onkologische Immuntherapie Nachrichten

Ein bispezifischer Antikörper formiert gezielt eine Armee neutrophiler Granulozyten gegen Krebszellen. An den Antikörper gekoppeltes TNF-alpha soll die Zellen zudem tief in solide Tumoren hineinführen.

Erhebliches Risiko für Kehlkopfkrebs bei mäßiger Dysplasie

29.05.2024 Larynxkarzinom Nachrichten

Fast ein Viertel der Personen mit mäßig dysplastischen Stimmlippenläsionen entwickelt einen Kehlkopftumor. Solche Personen benötigen daher eine besonders enge ärztliche Überwachung.

Update Onkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.