Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A narrative review to inform dietetics practice

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are common nutrition-impact symptoms experienced by cancer patients. They exert a detrimental effect on dietary intake, risk of malnutrition and quality of life. While CINV are primarily managed with medication, dietitians play an important role in the management of CINV-related complications such as reduced dietary intake. This review discusses the burden of nausea and vomiting which cancer patients can experience, including its effect on quality of life, nutrition status, and treatment outcomes. Implications for dietetic practice include the need to explore the nature of reported symptoms, identify predisposing risk factors, and to consider the use of a variety of interventions that are individualised to the patient’s symptoms. There are little clinical data regarding effective dietetic interventions for nausea and vomiting. In summary, this review discusses dietetic-related issues surrounding CINV including the pathophysiology, risk factors, prevalence, and both pharmacological and dietetic treatment options

The effects of a family-centered psychosocial-based nutrition intervention in patients with advanced cancer: the PiCNIC2 pilot randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition in advanced cancer patients is common but limited and inconclusive data exists on the effectiveness of nutrition interventions. Feasibility and acceptability of a novel family-based nutritional psychosocial intervention were established recently. The aims of this present study were to assess the feasibility of undertaking a randomised controlled trial of the latter intervention, to pilot test outcome measures and to explore preliminary outcomes.METHODS: Pilot randomised controlled trial recruiting advanced cancer patients and family caregivers in Australia and Hong Kong. Participants were randomised and assigned to one of two groups, either a family-centered nutritional intervention or the control group receiving usual care only. The intervention provided 2-3 h of direct dietitian contact time with patients and family members over a 4-6-week period. During the intervention, issues with nutrition impact symptoms and food or eating-related psychosocial concerns were addressed through nutrition counselling, with a focus on improving nutrition-related communication between the dyads and setting nutritional goals. Feasibility assessment included recruitment, consent rate, retention rate, and acceptability of assessment tools. Validated nutritional and quality of life self-reported measures were used to collect patient and caregiver outcome data, including the 3-day food diary, the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment Short Form, the Functional Assessment Anorexia/Cachexia scale, Eating-related Distress or Enjoyment, and measures of self-efficacy, carers' distress, anxiety and depression.RESULTS: Seventy-four patients and 54 family caregivers participated in the study. Recruitment was challenging, and for every patient agreeing to participate, 14-31 patients had to be screened. The consent rate was 44% in patients and 55% in caregivers. Only half the participants completed the trial's final assessment. The data showed promise for some patient outcomes in the intervention group, particularly with improvements in eating-related distress (p = 0.046 in the Australian data; p = 0.07 in the Hong Kong data), eating-related enjoyment (p = 0.024, Hong Kong data) and quality of life (p = 0.045, Australian data). Energy and protein intake also increased in a clinically meaningful way. Caregiver data on eating-related distress, anxiety, depression and caregiving burden, however, showed little or no change.CONCLUSIONS: Despite challenges with participant recruitment, the intervention demonstrates good potential to have positive effects on patients' nutritional status and eating-related distress. The results of this trial warrant a larger and fully-powered trial to ascertain the effectiveness of this intervention.TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with the Australian &amp; New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, registration number ACTRN12618001352291 .</p

The Scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) and its Association with Quality of Life in Ambulatory Patients Receiving Radiotherapy

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the scored Patient-generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) tool as an outcome measure in clinical nutrition practice and determine its association with quality of life (QoL). DESIGN: A prospective 4 week study assessing the nutritional status and QoL of ambulatory patients receiving radiation therapy to the head, neck, rectal or abdominal area. SETTING: Australian radiation oncology facilities. SUBJECTS: Sixty cancer patients aged 24-85 y. INTERVENTION: Scored PG-SGA questionnaire, subjective global assessment (SGA), QoL (EORTC QLQ-C30 version 3). RESULTS: According to SGA, 65.0% (39) of subjects were well-nourished, 28.3% (17) moderately or suspected of being malnourished and 6.7% (4) severely malnourished. PG-SGA score and global QoL were correlated (r=-0.66, P<0.001) at baseline. There was a decrease in nutritional status according to PG-SGA score (P<0.001) and SGA (P<0.001); and a decrease in global QoL (P<0.001) after 4 weeks of radiotherapy. There was a linear trend for change in PG-SGA score (P<0.001) and change in global QoL (P=0.003) between those patients who improved (5%) maintained (56.7%) or deteriorated (33.3%) in nutritional status according to SGA. There was a correlation between change in PG-SGA score and change in QoL after 4 weeks of radiotherapy (r=-0.55, P<0.001). Regression analysis determined that 26% of the variation of change in QoL was explained by change in PG-SGA (P=0.001). CONCLUSION: The scored PG-SGA is a nutrition assessment tool that identifies malnutrition in ambulatory oncology patients receiving radiotherapy and can be used to predict the magnitude of change in QoL

Recommendations for manganese supplementation to adult patients receiving long-term home parenteral nutrition: an analysis of the supporting evidence

Introduction: Manganese (Mn) toxicity is often observed in adult patients receiving long-term home parenteral nutrition (HPN), and differing recommendations on the safe level of Mn administration to these patients have been made in the literature over the past 10 years. Methods: This systematic review used the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) evidence hierarchy to assess the design and strength of individual studies (high I to low IV) and the overall grade of evidence (grade A high to grade D low). Results: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Levels of evidence ranged from high (NHMRC II) to mid-level (III-3). A widespread recommendation in the literature for patients receiving long-term HPN is 55 μg (1 μmol) Mn/d. Conclusion: The recommendation of 55 μg (1μmol) Mn/d is of moderate-strength evidence (NHMRC B grade). There is limited evidence to support not supplementing Mn to patients receiving long-term HPN. Further intervention studies providing high-level evidence (II and above) are required to determine the safety of not supplementing Mn to all patients receiving long-term HPN