Franke Jessica, Bishop Chris, Runco Daniel V
Marian University College of Osteopathic Medicine, 3200 Cold Spring Rd, Indianapolis, IN, 46222, USA.
Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, 705 Riley Hospital Drive, ROC Suite 4340, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA.
BMC Nutr. 2022 Dec 22;8(1):150. doi: 10.1186/s40795-022-00643-3.
Malnutrition and cachexia during pediatric cancer treatment worsen toxicity and quality-of-life. Clinical practice varies with lack of standard malnutrition definition and nutrition interventions. This scoping review highlights available malnutrition screening and intervention data in childhood cancer and the need for standardizing assessment and treatment.
Ovid Medline, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies containing malnutrition as the primary outcome with anthropometric, radiographic, or biochemical measurements. Secondary outcomes included validated nutritional assessment or screening tools. Two authors reviewed full manuscripts for inclusion. Narrative analysis was chosen over statistical analysis due to study heterogeneity.
The search yielded 234 articles and 17 articles identified from reference searching. Nine met inclusion criteria with six nutritional intervention studies (examining appetite stimulants, nutrition supplementation, and proactive feeding tubes) and three nutritional screening studies (algorithms or nutrition support teams) each with variable measures and outcomes. Both laboratory evaluations (albumin, prealbumin, total protein) and body measurement (weight loss, mid-upper arm circumference) were used. Studies demonstrated improved weight, without difference between formula or appetite stimulant used. Screening studies yielded mixed results on preventing weight loss, weight gain, and survival.
Our review demonstrated a paucity of evidence for malnutrition screening and intervention in pediatric cancer treatment. While a variety of malnutrition outcomes, interventions, and screening tools exist, nutritional interventions increased weight and decreased complications. Screening tools decreased malnutrition risk and may improve weight gain. Potential age- and disease-specific nutritional benefits and toxicities also exist, further highlighting the benefit of standardizing malnutrition definitions, screening, and interventions.
儿童癌症治疗期间的营养不良和恶病质会加重毒性反应并影响生活质量。由于缺乏标准的营养不良定义和营养干预措施,临床实践存在差异。本范围综述强调了儿童癌症中现有的营养不良筛查和干预数据,以及标准化评估和治疗的必要性。
检索Ovid Medline、CINAHL和Cochrane图书馆,查找以营养不良为主要结局且采用人体测量、影像学或生化测量方法的研究。次要结局包括经过验证的营养评估或筛查工具。两名作者对全文进行评审以确定是否纳入。由于研究存在异质性,故选择叙述性分析而非统计分析。
检索共获得234篇文章,通过参考文献检索又识别出17篇文章。9篇符合纳入标准,其中6项为营养干预研究(研究食欲刺激剂、营养补充剂和预防性喂养管),3项为营养筛查研究(算法或营养支持团队),每项研究的测量方法和结局各不相同。研究同时使用了实验室评估指标(白蛋白、前白蛋白、总蛋白)和身体测量指标(体重减轻、上臂中部周长)。研究表明体重有所改善,使用的配方奶或食欲刺激剂之间无差异。筛查研究在预防体重减轻、体重增加和生存方面得出了混合结果。
我们的综述表明,儿童癌症治疗中营养不良筛查和干预的证据不足。虽然存在多种营养不良结局、干预措施和筛查工具,但营养干预可增加体重并减少并发症。筛查工具可降低营养不良风险并可能改善体重增加。还存在潜在的年龄和疾病特异性营养益处及毒性反应,这进一步凸显了标准化营养不良定义、筛查和干预措施的益处。