A prospective randomized clinical trial of total parenteral nutrition in children with cancer. Comparison of morbidity in children requiring abdominal radiation and chemotherapy, with and without total parenteral nutrition. Parenteral nutrition is not superior to replacement fluid therapy for the supportive treatment of chemotherapy induced oral mucositis in children. Effect of total parenteral nutrition on marrow recovery during induction therapy for acute nonlymphocytic leukemia in childhood. Nutrition support using the American Dietetic Association medical nutrition therapy protocol for radiation oncology patients improves dietary intake compared with standard practice.
A prospective randomized clinical trial was undertaken to test the efficacy of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) among previously untreated children receiving abdominal/pelvic irradiation with or without adjuvant chemotherapy who were at risk for weight loss, malnutrition, and complications from treatment. Children were evaluated by weight/height determinations, anthropomorphic measurements, and laboratory studies. TPN was associated with an improved nutritional status during therapy as compared with control patients on ad libitum intake. However, when TPN was discontinued, weight declined and there were no differences among treated and control patients detected at three-month follow-up. Likewise there was no obvious effect from TPN on tolerance to therapy in the adequately nourished child. TPN as initial supportive therapy should be reserved for those children who are malnourished or marginally malnourished at the time of presentation. Close nutritional assessment during treatment is essential since approximately 25% of children undergoing abdominal/pelvic radiotherapy with chemotherapy can be expected to become malnourished during an initial course of therapy. We evaluated the effectiveness of total parenteral nutrition and placing the "bowel at rest," as compared to that of ad libitum food intake, on nutritional status and tolerance to combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy in a randomized, prospective trial in children with previously untreated malignancy requiring abdominal and pelvic irradiation and chemotherapy. Administration of TPN was found to be safe and efficacious in maintaining the children in good nutritional status during combined therapy; one-third of the control patients became malnourished and required TPN. There was no beneficial effect of "bowel at rest" and TPN on the ability of patients to tolerate combined therapies in terms of decreased toxicity; however, use of TPN was associated with improved adherence to chemotherapy schedules. Following termination of TPN or ad libitum food intake, and while receiving chemotherapy, the majority of the children who had previously received TPN lost significant weight. To date there has been no difference in mortality rate between the control and TPN groups. Although we conclude that TPN per se had little beneficial effect beyond that of maintaining good nutritional status, every child undergoing intensive combined therapy should have early and periodic assessments of nutritional status, so that the early signs of malnutrition can be detected, and the adverse effects of malnutrition can be prevented by nutritional replenishment, by TPN, or by other methods. Many paediatric oncology centres apply parenteral nutrition (PN) in children with severe oral mucositis after chemotherapy. However, no convincing data exist to support this treatment strategy. The aim of our study was to elucidate a possible advantage of PN versus intravenous replacement fluid therapy (FT). In a prospective randomized study, 30 children with mucositis WHO grade IV were assigned to receive either PN or intravenous replacement FT. Weight, total body water, fat-free mass (measured by impedance analysis) and peripheral white blood cells were assessed daily. For aspects of quality of life and economics, the length of hospital stay, the incidence of infections, the days on intravenous antibiotics and delay of scheduled chemotherapy were examined. Children with PN gained body weight significantly compared to baseline and to FT due to an augmentation of fat mass while total body water and fat-free mass significantly decreased. In children with FT, body weight remained stable while total body water and fat-free mass significantly increased, thereby loosing fat mass. We observed no differences in recovery of peripheral white blood cells (WBC), incidence of infections, hospitalization time, days on intravenous antibiotics, days on opioid analgesics and delay of the next scheduled chemotherapy cycle. Although children with PN gained weight in form of fat mass, this did not translate into a clinical benefit for the patients such as earlier recovery of WBC counts, shorter hospitalization time, a decreased use of analgesics or less delay of the next scheduled chemotherapy cycle. Our findings therefore do not support the hypothesis that PN is superior to FT when used for less than 10 days for oral mucositis. Ten well-nourished children with acute nonlymphocytic leukemia (ANLL) were randomly assigned to groups that received (a) total parenteral nutrition (TPN) throughout the period of induction therapy or (b) standard nutritional support. Body mass and skin hypersensitivity reactions were better maintained in experimental patients. Patients on TPN had higher total white blood counts, absolute granulocyte counts, and platelet counts than did control patients during the course. No difference was apparent in the frequency of febrile episodes, or other aspects of the patients' courses. This preliminary report suggests that intensive nutritional support may accelerate the recovery of normal marrow function during induction therapy for ANLL. A randomized controlled trial previously conducted in radiation oncology patients demonstrated that nutrition intervention had a beneficial impact on body weight, nutritional status, and quality of life compared with standard practice, but it did not report on dietary intake data.
                To determine the impact of nutrition intervention compared with standard practice on dietary intake in outpatients receiving radiotherapy.
                Prospective, randomized, controlled trial.
                Sixty consecutive radiation oncology outpatients (51 men and nine women; age 61.9+/-14 years [mean+/-standard deviation]).
                Australian private radiotherapy facility.
                Patients were randomly assigned to receive either nutrition intervention (n=29) (nutrition counseling following the American Dietetic Association [ADA] medical nutrition therapy [MNT] protocol for radiation oncology) or standard practice (n=31) (general nutrition talk and booklet).
                Dietary intake (protein, energy, fiber) assessed at baseline and at 4, 8, and 12 weeks after starting radiotherapy.
                Repeated-measures analysis of variance done on an intention to treat basis.
                The nutrition intervention group had a higher mean total energy (P=0.029) and protein intake (P<0.001) compared with the standard practice group. Mean intake per kilogram of body weight for the nutrition intervention group ranged from 28 to 31 kcal/kg/day compared with 25 to 29 kcal/kg/day for the standard practice group (P=0.022). The nutrition intervention group had a higher mean protein intake (1.1 to 1.3 g/kg/day) compared with the standard practice group (1.0 to 1.1 g/kg/day) (P=0.001). Although the change in fiber intake between the groups was not significant, there was a trend in the anticipated direction (P=0.083).
                Intensive nutrition intervention following the ADA MNT protocol results in improved dietary intake compared with standard practice and seems to beneficially impact nutrition-related outcomes previously observed in oncology outpatients receiving radiotherapy. The ADA MNT protocol for radiation oncology is a useful guide to the level of nutrition support required.
There is limited evidence from individual trials to suggest that parenteral nutrition is more effective than enteral nutrition in well-nourished children and young people with cancer undergoing chemotherapy. The evidence for other methods of nutritional support remains unclear. No studies were identified comparing the nutritional content in the PN or EN groups of studies. Further research, incorporating larger sample sizes and rigorous methodology utilising valid and reliable outcome measures, is essential.