Resting energy expenditure of patients with gynecologic malignancies

Roland Dickerson, Kimberly G. White, Paul G. Curcillo, Stephanie A. King, James L. Mullen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate resting energy expenditure compared to predicted energy expenditure in patients with cervical or ovarian carcinoma who require specialized nutritional support. Design: Women with biopsy-proven cervical or ovarian carcinoma referred to the Nutrition Support Service were studied. Resting energy expenditure was measured by indirect calorimetry and compared to predicted energy expenditure (PEE) as determined by the Harris-Benedict equation for females. Results: Sixty one patients were studied. Patients with ovarian cancer (n = 31) had a significantly higher measured resting energy expenditure (%PEE) than patients with cervical cancer (109 ± 18% vs. 98 ± 16%, p < 0.02, respectively). This difference in measured resting energy expenditure betw'een groups could not be explained by differences in the extent of disease, nutritional status, body temperature, or nutrient intake between groups. A greater proportion of patients with ovarian cancer were hypermetabolic (> 110% of predicted) in comparison to patients with cervical cancer (55% vs. 13%, p < 0.01, respectively). Measured resting energy expenditure varied between 53% and 157% of predicted for the entire population. Conclusion: Ovarian cancer patients are more hypermetabolic than cervical cancer patients. The HarrisBenedict equation for females is a unreliable estimate of caloric expenditure in patients with cervical or ovarian cancer receiving specialized nutritional support.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)448-454
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of the American College of Nutrition
Volume14
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 1995

Fingerprint

Energy Metabolism
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
Neoplasms
Ovarian Neoplasms
Nutritional Support
Carcinoma
Indirect Calorimetry
Health Expenditures
Biopsy
Population

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Nutrition and Dietetics

Cite this

Resting energy expenditure of patients with gynecologic malignancies. / Dickerson, Roland; White, Kimberly G.; Curcillo, Paul G.; King, Stephanie A.; Mullen, James L.

In: Journal of the American College of Nutrition, Vol. 14, No. 5, 01.10.1995, p. 448-454.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Dickerson, Roland ; White, Kimberly G. ; Curcillo, Paul G. ; King, Stephanie A. ; Mullen, James L. / Resting energy expenditure of patients with gynecologic malignancies. In: Journal of the American College of Nutrition. 1995 ; Vol. 14, No. 5. pp. 448-454.
@article{ba0d3f8a259d4b60a3d0d7b9561dbe89,
title = "Resting energy expenditure of patients with gynecologic malignancies",
abstract = "Objective: To evaluate resting energy expenditure compared to predicted energy expenditure in patients with cervical or ovarian carcinoma who require specialized nutritional support. Design: Women with biopsy-proven cervical or ovarian carcinoma referred to the Nutrition Support Service were studied. Resting energy expenditure was measured by indirect calorimetry and compared to predicted energy expenditure (PEE) as determined by the Harris-Benedict equation for females. Results: Sixty one patients were studied. Patients with ovarian cancer (n = 31) had a significantly higher measured resting energy expenditure ({\%}PEE) than patients with cervical cancer (109 ± 18{\%} vs. 98 ± 16{\%}, p < 0.02, respectively). This difference in measured resting energy expenditure betw'een groups could not be explained by differences in the extent of disease, nutritional status, body temperature, or nutrient intake between groups. A greater proportion of patients with ovarian cancer were hypermetabolic (> 110{\%} of predicted) in comparison to patients with cervical cancer (55{\%} vs. 13{\%}, p < 0.01, respectively). Measured resting energy expenditure varied between 53{\%} and 157{\%} of predicted for the entire population. Conclusion: Ovarian cancer patients are more hypermetabolic than cervical cancer patients. The HarrisBenedict equation for females is a unreliable estimate of caloric expenditure in patients with cervical or ovarian cancer receiving specialized nutritional support.",
author = "Roland Dickerson and White, {Kimberly G.} and Curcillo, {Paul G.} and King, {Stephanie A.} and Mullen, {James L.}",
year = "1995",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/07315724.1995.10718535",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "448--454",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Nutrition",
issn = "0731-5724",
publisher = "American College Of Nutrition",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Resting energy expenditure of patients with gynecologic malignancies

AU - Dickerson, Roland

AU - White, Kimberly G.

AU - Curcillo, Paul G.

AU - King, Stephanie A.

AU - Mullen, James L.

PY - 1995/10/1

Y1 - 1995/10/1

N2 - Objective: To evaluate resting energy expenditure compared to predicted energy expenditure in patients with cervical or ovarian carcinoma who require specialized nutritional support. Design: Women with biopsy-proven cervical or ovarian carcinoma referred to the Nutrition Support Service were studied. Resting energy expenditure was measured by indirect calorimetry and compared to predicted energy expenditure (PEE) as determined by the Harris-Benedict equation for females. Results: Sixty one patients were studied. Patients with ovarian cancer (n = 31) had a significantly higher measured resting energy expenditure (%PEE) than patients with cervical cancer (109 ± 18% vs. 98 ± 16%, p < 0.02, respectively). This difference in measured resting energy expenditure betw'een groups could not be explained by differences in the extent of disease, nutritional status, body temperature, or nutrient intake between groups. A greater proportion of patients with ovarian cancer were hypermetabolic (> 110% of predicted) in comparison to patients with cervical cancer (55% vs. 13%, p < 0.01, respectively). Measured resting energy expenditure varied between 53% and 157% of predicted for the entire population. Conclusion: Ovarian cancer patients are more hypermetabolic than cervical cancer patients. The HarrisBenedict equation for females is a unreliable estimate of caloric expenditure in patients with cervical or ovarian cancer receiving specialized nutritional support.

AB - Objective: To evaluate resting energy expenditure compared to predicted energy expenditure in patients with cervical or ovarian carcinoma who require specialized nutritional support. Design: Women with biopsy-proven cervical or ovarian carcinoma referred to the Nutrition Support Service were studied. Resting energy expenditure was measured by indirect calorimetry and compared to predicted energy expenditure (PEE) as determined by the Harris-Benedict equation for females. Results: Sixty one patients were studied. Patients with ovarian cancer (n = 31) had a significantly higher measured resting energy expenditure (%PEE) than patients with cervical cancer (109 ± 18% vs. 98 ± 16%, p < 0.02, respectively). This difference in measured resting energy expenditure betw'een groups could not be explained by differences in the extent of disease, nutritional status, body temperature, or nutrient intake between groups. A greater proportion of patients with ovarian cancer were hypermetabolic (> 110% of predicted) in comparison to patients with cervical cancer (55% vs. 13%, p < 0.01, respectively). Measured resting energy expenditure varied between 53% and 157% of predicted for the entire population. Conclusion: Ovarian cancer patients are more hypermetabolic than cervical cancer patients. The HarrisBenedict equation for females is a unreliable estimate of caloric expenditure in patients with cervical or ovarian cancer receiving specialized nutritional support.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029096417&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029096417&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/07315724.1995.10718535

DO - 10.1080/07315724.1995.10718535

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 448

EP - 454

JO - Journal of the American College of Nutrition

JF - Journal of the American College of Nutrition

SN - 0731-5724

IS - 5

ER -