Literature DB >> 16327975

Enteral (oral or tube administration) nutritional support and eicosapentaenoic acid in patients with cancer: a systematic review.

M Elia1, M A E Van Bokhorst-de van der Schueren, J Garvey, A Goedhart, K Lundholm, G Nitenberg, R J Stratton.   

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review was to determine the efficacy and potential benefits of enteral nutritional support [oral nutritional supplements (ONS) or enteral tube feeding (ETF)], and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA, free acid, ethyl esters or fish oil; provided as capsules or enriched ONS or ETF) in patients with cancer. Clinical studies were identified using electronic databases, and studies were selected according to predetermined criteria. For each treatment modality (chemo/radiotherapy, surgery, and palliative care), the comparisons of interest were nutritional support vs. routine care (no nutritional support), EPA supplement (capsule or enriched ONS or ETF) vs. routine care (no supplement or standard supplement), ETF vs. parenteral nutrition (PN). The reviewed outcomes were dietary intake, anthropometry, clinical (mortality, length of hospital stay, complications, and quality of life) and haematological/biochemical (white blood cell count, serum transferrin and albumin, CD3-positive lymphocytes, and inflammatory markers). Meta-analyses were performed where possible. In patients undergoing radiotherapy, meta-analysis showed that ONS significantly increase dietary intake (381 kcal/day, 95% CI 193 to 569 in 3 RCTs) compared to routine care. In patients undergoing surgery, meta-analyses showed that ETF results in a significantly shorter length of hospital stay (1.72 fewer days, 95% CI 0.90 to 2.54 in 8 RCTs), lower incidence of any complications (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.77 in 4 RCTs) and infectious complications (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.82 in 11 RCTs) and lower sepsis scores (2.21 points, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.92 in 2 RCTs), but no difference in mortality (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.29 in 7 RCTs) compared to PN. There was also no difference in mortality between ONS or ETF vs. routine care in patients undergoing chemotherapy/radiotherapy (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.62-1.61 in 4 RCTs) or surgery (OR 2.44, 95% CI 0.75 to 7.95 in 4 RCTs). Individual studies of EPA supplementation as capsules showed improvements in survival, complications and inflammatory markers in patients undergoing bone marrow transplant (BMT). In palliative care patients receiving EPA-enriched ONS or capsules, there were inconsistent positive effects on survival and quality of life. In those undergoing surgery, EPA-enriched ETF had no effect. Further research is required to elucidate the clinical efficacy of enteral nutrition support, including the potential benefits of EPA supplementation, in patients with cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16327975     DOI: 10.3892/ijo.28.1.5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Oncol        ISSN: 1019-6439            Impact factor:   5.650


  18 in total

Review 1.  Enteral versus parenteral nutrition after gastrointestinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in the English literature.

Authors:  Takero Mazaki; Kiyoko Ebisawa
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2007-10-16       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 2.  Anorexia-Cachexia syndrome in cancer: implications of the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway.

Authors:  Carlos Camps; Vega Iranzo; Roy M Bremnes; Rafael Sirera
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2006-07-04       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Weight loss at the first month of palliative chemotherapy predicts survival outcomes in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

Authors:  Chan-Young Ock; Do-Youn Oh; Joongyub Lee; Tae-Yong Kim; Kyung-Hun Lee; Sae-Won Han; Seock-Ah Im; Tae-You Kim; Yung-Jue Bang
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2015-03-08       Impact factor: 7.370

4.  Nutrition intervention using an eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA)-containing supplement in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Effects on nutritional and inflammatory status: a phase II trial.

Authors:  Jane A Read; Philip J Beale; Dianne H Volker; Narelle Smith; Annabel Childs; Stephen J Clarke
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2006-10-05       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 5.  [Nutrition, lifestyle, physical activity, and supportive care during chemotherapeutic treatment].

Authors:  G Lümmen; T Jäger; F Sommer; T Ebert; B Schmitz-Draeger
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 6.  Malnutrition in hospital: the clinical and economic implications.

Authors:  Christian Löser
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2010-12-27       Impact factor: 5.594

7.  Diagnostic criteria of cancer cachexia: relation to quality of life, exercise capacity and survival in unselected palliative care patients.

Authors:  Ola Wallengren; Kent Lundholm; Ingvar Bosaeus
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2013-01-13       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 8.  Marine polyunsaturated fatty acids and cancer therapy.

Authors:  V C Vaughan; M-R Hassing; P A Lewandowski
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Cancer cachexia: mechanisms and clinical implications.

Authors:  Claire L Donohoe; Aoife M Ryan; John V Reynolds
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2011-06-13       Impact factor: 2.260

10.  A prospective analysis of factors that influence weight loss in patients undergoing radiotherapy.

Authors:  Jon Cacicedo; Francisco Casquero; Lorea Martinez-Indart; Olga del Hoyo; Alfonso Gomez de Iturriaga; Arturo Navarro; Pedro Bilbao
Journal:  Chin J Cancer       Date:  2013-10-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.