The clinical and cost-effectiveness of supplemental parenteral nutrition in oncology

BackgroundClinical guidelines recommend that parenteral nutrition (PN) is added to enteral nutrition (EN; supplemental parenteral nutrition (SPN)) in order to meet energy and protein needs in patients with cancer when EN alone is insufficient. However, although cancer-related malnutrition is common, there is poor awareness of the value of nutritional care, resulting in SPN being chronically underused.MethodsWe performed a targeted literature review and exploratory cost-utility analysis to gather evidence on the clinical effectiveness of SPN, and to estimate the potential cost-effectiveness of SPN versus EN alone in an example cancer setting.ResultsThe literature review identified studies linking SPN with malnutrition markers, and studies linking malnutrition markers with clinical outcomes. SPN was linked to improvements in body mass index (BMI), fat-free mass, phase angle (PhA) and prealbumin. Of these markers, BMI and PhA were strong predictors of survival. By combining published data, we generated indirect estimates of the overall survival HR associated with SPN; these ranged from 0.80 to 0.99 (mode 0.87). In patients with Stage IV inoperable pancreatic cancer, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio versus EN alone was estimated to be £41 350 or £91 501 depending on whether nursing and home delivery costs for EN and SPN were combined or provided separately.ConclusionDespite a lack of direct evidence, the results of the literature review demonstrate that SPN may provide important clinical and quality of life benefits to patients with cancer. The potential for any improvement in outcomes in the modelled patient population is very limited, so cost-effectiveness may be greater in patients with less severe disease and other types of cancer.

Influence of Early versus Late supplemental ParenteraL Nutrition on long-term quality of life in ICU patients after gastrointestinal oncological surgery (hELPLiNe): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background Nutrition plays a major role in intensive care unit (ICU) treatment, influencing ICU length of stay and patient’s survival. If preferable enteral nutrition administration is not feasible, ESPEN and ASPEN guidelines recommend initiation of a supplemental parenteral route between the first and seventh day, but exact timing remains elusive. While rapid development in critical care enabled significant reduction in the mortality rate of ICU patients, this improvement also tripled the number of patients going to rehabilitation. Thus, it is quality of life after ICU that has become the subject of interest of clinicians and healthcare policy-makers. A growing body of evidence indicates that protein turnover in the early phase of critical illness may play a crucial role in the preservation of lean body mass. A negative protein balance may lead to muscle wasting that persists weeks and months after ICU stay, resulting in deterioration of physical functioning. Folliwing oncological gastrointestinal tract surgery, patients are threatened with negative protein turnover due to cancer and extensive surgical insult. Methods This is a multi-centre, single-blinded, randomised controlled trial. The study population includes patients admitted to ICU units after major oncological gastrointestinal surgery that require supplemental parenteral nutrition. After initiation of enteral nutrition, the intervention group receives remaining daily requirement via supplemental parenteral nutrition on the first day of ICU stay while the control group is not supplemented parenterally until the seventh day of ICU stay while enteral nutrition is gradually increased. Primary endpoint: long-term quality of life measured in the physical component score (PCS) of SF-36 questionnaire at 3 and 6 months after ICU admission. Discussion To our knowledge, this is the first trial to investigate the influence of early supplemental parenteral nutrition on long-term quality of life after major oncological gastrointestinal surgery. We assume that, particularly in this population of patients, early supplemental parenteral nutrition may increase the long-term quality of life. The study construction also allows establishment of patients’ PCS SF-36 score prior to surgery and mean change in PCS SF-36 score during the recovery period, which is rarely seen in studies on critically ill patients. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03699371 registered on 12 October 2018.

Early Supplemental Parenteral Nutrition in Critically Ill Children: An Update

In critically ill children admitted to pediatric intensive care units (PICUs), enteral nutrition (EN) is often delayed due to gastrointestinal dysfunction or interrupted. Since a macronutrient deficit in these patients has been associated with adverse outcomes in observational studies, supplemental parenteral nutrition (PN) in PICUs has long been widely advised to meeting nutritional requirements. However, uncertainty of timing of initiation, optimal dose and composition of PN has led to a wide variation in previous guidelines and current clinical practices. The PEPaNIC (Early versus Late Parenteral Nutrition in the Pediatric ICU) randomized controlled trial recently showed that withholding PN in the first week in PICUs reduced incidence of new infections and accelerated recovery as compared with providing supplemental PN early (within 24 hours after PICU admission), irrespective of diagnosis, severity of illness, risk of malnutrition or age. The early withholding of amino acids in particular, which are powerful suppressors of intracellular quality control by autophagy, statistically explained this outcome benefit. Importantly, two years after PICU admission, not providing supplemental PN early in PICUs did not negatively affect mortality, growth or health status, and significantly improved neurocognitive development. These findings have an important impact on the recently issued guidelines for PN administration to critically ill children. In this review, we summarize the most recent literature that provides evidence on the implications for clinical practice with regard to the use of early supplemental PN in critically ill children.