17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Impact on Health‐Related Quality of Life of Parenteral Nutrition for Patients with Advanced Cancer Cachexia: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Malnutrition worsens health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) and the prognosis of patients with advanced cancer. This study aimed to assess the clinical benefits of parenteral nutrition (PN) over oral feeding (OF) for patients with advanced cancer cachexia and without intestinal impairment.

          Material and Methods

          In this prospective multicentric randomized controlled study, patients with advanced cancer and malnutrition were randomly assigned to optimized nutritional care with or without supplemental PN. Zelen's method was used for randomization to facilitate inclusions. Nutritional and performance status and HRQoL using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ‐C15‐PAL questionnaire were evaluated at baseline and monthly until death. Primary endpoint was HRQoL deterioration‐free survival (DFS) defined as a definitive deterioration of ≥10 points compared with baseline, or death.

          Results

          Among the 148 randomized patients, 48 patients were in the experimental arm with PN, 63 patients were in the control arm with OF only, and 37 patients were not included because of early withdrawal or refused consent. In an intent to treat analysis, there was no difference in HRQoL DFS between the PN arm or OF arm for the three targeted dimensions: global health (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88–1.94; p = .18), physical functioning (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.06–2.35; p = .024), and fatigue (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.80–1.77; p = .40); there was a negative trend for overall survival among patients in the PN arm. In as treated analysis, serious adverse events (mainly infectious) were more frequent in the PN arm than in the OF arm ( p = .01).

          Conclusion

          PN improved neither HRQoL nor survival and induced more serious adverse events than OF among patients with advanced cancer and malnutrition. Clinical trial identification number. NCT02151214

          Implications for Practice

          This clinical trial showed that parenteral nutrition improved neither quality of life nor survival and generated more serious adverse events than oral feeding only among patients with advanced cancer cachexia and no intestinal impairment. Parenteral nutrition should not be prescribed for patients with advanced cancer, cachexia, and no intestinal failure when life expectancy is shorter than 3 months. Further studies are needed to assess the useful period with a potential benefit of artificial nutrition for patients with advanced cancer.

          Abstract

          Malnutrition impairs clinical outcome in patients with advanced cancer. This study compared parenteral nutrition with oral feeding for malnourished patients with advanced cancer and functional gastrointestinal tract.

          Related collections

          Most cited references37

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Prevalence of malnutrition and current use of nutrition support in patients with cancer.

          The aim of this study was to evaluate on 1 day the prevalence of malnutrition in different types of cancer and the use of nutrition support in patients with cancer.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Oral nutritional interventions in malnourished patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

            International guidelines on the nutritional management of patients with cancer recommend intervention with dietary advice and/or oral nutritional supplements in patients who are malnourished or those judged to be at nutritional risk, but the evidence base for these recommendations is lacking. We examined the effect of oral nutritional interventions in this population on nutritional and clinical outcomes and quality of life (QOL). Electronic searches of several databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL (from the first record to February 2010) were searched to identify randomized controlled trials of patients with cancer who were malnourished or considered to be at risk of malnutrition and receiving oral nutritional support compared with routine care. We performed a meta-analysis using a fixed effect model, or random effects models when statistically significant heterogeneity was present, to calculate relative risk (mortality) or mean difference (weight, energy intake, and QOL) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was determined by using the χ(2) test and the I(2) statistic. All statistical tests were two-sided. Thirteen studies were identified and included 1414 participants. The quality of the studies varied, and there was considerable clinical and statistical heterogeneity. Nutritional intervention was associated with statistically significant improvements in weight and energy intake compared with routine care (mean difference in weight = 1.86 kg, 95% CI = 0.25 to 3.47, P = .02; and mean difference in energy intake = 432 kcal/d, 95% CI = 172 to 693, P = .001). However, after removing the main sources of heterogeneity, there was no statistically significant difference in weight gain or energy intake. Nutritional intervention had a beneficial effect on some aspects of QOL (emotional functioning, dyspnea, loss of appetite, and global QOL) but had no effect on mortality (relative risk = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.92 to 1.22, P = .43; I(2) = 0%; P(heterogeneity) = .56). Oral nutritional interventions are effective at increasing nutritional intake and improving some aspects of QOL in patients with cancer who are malnourished or are at nutritional risk but do not appear to improve mortality.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Central tenet of cancer cachexia therapy: do patients with advanced cancer have exploitable anabolic potential?

              Skeletal muscle wasting is considered the central feature of cachexia, but the potential for skeletal muscle anabolism in patients with advanced cancer is unproven. We investigated the clinical course of skeletal muscle wasting in advanced cancer and the window of possible muscle anabolism. We conducted a quantitative analysis of computed tomography (CT) images for the loss and gain of muscle in population-based cohorts of advanced cancer patients (lung, colorectal, and pancreas cancer and cholangiocarcinoma) in a longitudinal observational study. Advanced-cancer patients (n = 368; median survival: 196 d) had a total of 1279 CT images over the course of their disease. With consideration of all time points, muscle loss occurred in 39% of intervals between any 2 scans. However, the overall frequency of muscle gain was 15.4%, and muscle was stable in 45.6% of intervals between any 2 scans, which made the maintenance or gain of muscle the predominant behavior. Multinomial logistic regression revealed that being within 90 d (compared with >90 d) from death was the principal risk factor for muscle loss (OR: 2.67; 95% CI: 1.45, 4.94; P = 0.002), and muscle gain was correspondingly less likely (OR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.20, 0.69; P = 0.002) at this time. Sex, age, BMI, and tumor group were not significant predictors of muscle loss or gain. A window of anabolic potential exists at defined early phases of the disease trajectory (>90 d survival), creating an opportunity for nutritional intervention to stop or reverse cachexia. Cancer patients within 90 d of death have a low likelihood of anabolic potential.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                carole.bouleuc@curie.fr
                Journal
                Oncologist
                Oncologist
                10.1002/(ISSN)1549-490X
                ONCO
                theoncologist
                The Oncologist
                John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (Hoboken, USA )
                1083-7159
                1549-490X
                25 March 2020
                May 2020
                : 25
                : 5 ( doiID: 10.1002/onco.v25.5 )
                : e843-e851
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] INSERM Centre d'Investigation Clinique (CIC) 1431, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Besançon France
                [ 2 ] Methodology and Quality of Life in Oncology Unit (INSERM Unité Mixte de Recherche [UMR] 1098), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Besançon France
                [ 3 ] Medical Oncology Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Besançon France
                [ 4 ] French National Platform Quality of Life and Cancer Besançon France
                [ 5 ] Department of Supportive Care, Institut Jean Godinot Reims France
                [ 6 ] Department of Supportive Care, Institut de cancérologie de Lorraine Vandoeuvre‐lès‐Nancy France
                [ 7 ] Department of Supportive Care, Centre Paul Strauss Strasbourg France
                [ 8 ] Department of Supportive Care, Centre Oscar Lambret Lille France
                [ 9 ] Department of Supportive Care, Centre Léon Bérard Lyon France
                [ 10 ] Medical Oncology Department, Centre Georges‐François Leclerc Dijon France
                [ 11 ] Medical Oncology Department, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris (APHP) Créteil France
                [ 12 ] Department of Supportive Care, Centre François‐Baclesse Caen France
                [ 13 ] Tranversal Unit of Nutrition, Institut Gustave Roussy Villejuif France
                [ 14 ] Medical Oncology Department, Centre Hospitalier (CH) La Timone Marseille France
                [ 15 ] Department of Supportive Care, Institut Paoli‐Calmettes Marseille France
                Author notes
                [*] [* ]Correspondence: Carole Bouleuc, M.D., Department of Supportive Care, Institut Curie, 26 rue d'Ulm, 75005 Paris, France. Telephone: 331‐44‐32‐46‐40; e‐mail: carole.bouleuc@ 123456curie.fr .
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0451-7720
                Article
                ONCO13287
                10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0856
                7216468
                32212354
                eb11d8ed-df72-4148-8195-6528ff9f63d1
                © 2020 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of AlphaMed Press.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

                History
                : 09 November 2019
                : 07 February 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 2, Pages: 9, Words: 6347
                Categories
                26
                Symptom Management and Supportive Care
                Symptom Management and Supportive Care
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                May 2020
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:5.8.1 mode:remove_FC converted:12.05.2020

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                palliative care,malnutrition,parenteral nutrition,cancer,zelen's method
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                palliative care, malnutrition, parenteral nutrition, cancer, zelen's method

                Comments

                Comment on this article