Table 1.
Summary of studies using direct measures of taste and/or smell and measures of food behavior.
| Study | Subjects and Cancer Type (n) | Study Design | Chemosensory Evaluation | Food Behavior Evaluation | Outcome | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stimuli | Evaluation | Food Aspects | Method(s) | ||||
| Carson and Gormican, 1997 [20] | Breast (n = 14) or colon (n = 15); controls (n = 28) | Prospective, longitudinal cohort study; baseline and after 2 weeks of treatment | Sucrose, sodium chloride, hydrochloric acid, urea | Taste: DT and RT presented as oral drops | Appetite, amount eaten, consumption of specific menu items | Questionnaire (rated as increased, decreased, or no change) | Prior to treatment, there was a significant correlation between increased sucrose RT (decreased sensitivity) with reduced appetite within cancer patient groups |
| Trant et al., 1982 [21] | Upper gastrointestinal or lung (n = 62) | Cohort study post-treatment | Cherry drink with sucrose, tomato juice with sodium chloride, lemonade with citric acid, tonic water with urea (five conc. of each) | Taste: Intensity and hedonic rating on a 10-cm labeled analog scale (0–10) | Energy intake and number of servings | 24-h dietary recall | Higher ratings for salt intensity associated with increased energy intake |
| Ovessen et al., 1991 [22] | Breast (n = 4), lung (n = 16), ovarian (n = 11) | Prospective, longitudinal; visits at baseline and after three treatment cycles (2–3 months postbaseline) | Anodal current (2.5–370 µA) using a gustometer | Taste: DT | Dietary intake | 3-day food record | No relationship between taste or smell DT and food intake |
| Pyridine | Smell: DT using squeeze bottles | ||||||
| Pattison et al., 1997 [23] | Non-specified cancer type (n = 22); controls (n = 16) | Cross-sectional cohort study; visit not specified | Sweet, sour, salty, and bitter (compounds not stated) | Taste: DT (presentation method not stated) | Dietary intake | Weighted measurement of food intake for one meal on three different days | No relationship between taste DT measures and macronutrient intake |
| Sánchez-Lara et al., 2010 [24] | Unspecified cancer type (n = 30); controls (n = 30) | Cross-sectional cohort study; visit after second treatment cycle | Sucrose, urea, sodium glutamate | Taste: DT and RT using whole-mouth stimuli | Dietary intake | SNUT food frequency questionnaire | Patients with higher sucrose DT consumed less protein, carbohydrate, zinc, and overall calories; patients with higher urea RT consumed less protein, carbohydrate, fat, and overall calories |
| Boltong et al., 2014 [25] | Breast (n = 52) | Prospective longitudinal; visits: baseline, beginning, middle, and late in third cycle, beginning of last cycle, and 2 months after treatment | Sucrose, sodium chloride, citric acid, caffeine, and monosodium glutamate | Taste: Identification *: Method of investigating sensitivity of taste using whole-mouth stimuli | Dietary intake | Food frequency questionnaire | Deterioration in identification of all five taste qualities correlated with reduced energy intake |
| IJpma et al., 2016 [18] | Testicular (n = 50); controls (n = 48) | Cross-sectional cohort; visits 1, 3, 5, or 7 years after treatment | Sucrose, citric acid, quinine HCl, sodium chloride | Taste: RT using taste strips | Dietary intake food preference | Food frequency questionnaire; preference for pictures of snack products | No relationship between taste/smell scores and food preference or dietary intake |
| n-butanol and a set of 16 common odors | Smell: DT, discrimination, identification, using Sniffin’ Sticks | ||||||
| Turcott et al., 2016 [26] | Lung (n = 40) | Prospective longitudinal; visits: baseline, after two cycles | Sucrose, urea, sodium glutamate presented as whole-mouth stimuli | Taste: DT and RT | Dietary intake, appetite | SNUT food frequency questionnaire | Increase in sweetness sensitivity (i.e., lower DT from baseline) associated with decreased intake of protein, fat, and iron |
| IJpma et al., 2017 [27] | Testicular (n = 21); controls (n = 48) | Cross-sectional and prospective longitudinal; visits: baseline, before and after cycles 1 and 2, end of treatment, 7 and 12 months from start of treatment | Sucrose, citric acid, quinine HCl, sodium chloride | Taste: RT using taste strips | Dietary intake food preference | Food frequency questionnaire; preference for pictures of snack products | No relationship between taste/smell scores with food preferences or dietary intake |
| n-butanol and a set of 16 common odors | Smell: DT, discrimination, identification, using Sniffin’ Sticks | ||||||
| de Vries et al., 2017 [28] | Oesophago-gastric (n = 15) | Prospective longitudinal; visits at baseline and before start of third cycle | n-butanol and a set of 16 common odors | Smell: DT, discrimination, identification using Sniffin’ Sticks | Food preferences | MFPRT rating | No relationship between taste/smell and food preferences |
| Sucrose, citric acid, sodium chloride, quinine HCl | Taste: RT using taste strips | ||||||
| de Vries et al., 2018 [17] | Breast (n = 28); controls (n = 28) | Prospective longitudinal; visits at baseline, during treatment, and 1–3 weeks and 6 months after treatment | Sucrose, sodium chloride, citric acid, quinine HCl | Taste: RT using taste strips | Food preferences | MFPRT rating | No relationship between taste/smell and food preferences; no significant changes in ranking of sampled spiked beverages |
| Kool-Aid with sucrose, tomato juice with sodium chloride (five conc. of each) | Taste: Preference (rank samples in order of liking) | ||||||
| n-butanol and a set of 16 common odors | Smell: DT, discrimination, identification using Sniffin’ sticks | ||||||
* ISO 3972:2011: International Organization for Standardization—method of investigating sensitivity of taste. DT—taste or odor detection threshold; MFPRT—macronutrient and food preference rating task (rating of food pictures); RT—taste or odor recognition threshold; SNUT—nutritional assessment system habits and nutrient intake (Spanish); conc.—concentration.