Standardized and Individualized Parenteral Nutrition Mixtures in a Pediatric Home Parenteral Nutrition Population

OBJECTIVES: Studies evaluating efficacy or safety of standardized parenteral nutrition (PN) versus individualized PN are lacking. We aimed to assess effects on growth and safety of standardized PN compared with individualized PN in our Home PN group. METHODS: Descriptive cohort study in Dutch children on Home PN, in which standardized PN was compared with individualized PN. Both groups received similar micronutrient-supplementation. Primary outcome was growth over 2 years, secondary outcomes were electrolyte disturbances and biochemical abnormalities. Additionally, patients were matched for age to control for potential confounding characteristics. RESULTS: Fifty patients (50% girls, median age 6.5 years) were included, 16 (32%) received standardized PN mixtures. Age (11 vs 5 years), gestational age (39.2 vs 36.2 weeks) and PN duration (97 vs 39 months) were significantly higher in the group receiving standardized PN (P: ≤0.001; 0.027; 0.013 respectively). The standardized PN group showed an increase in weight-for-age (WFA), compared with a decrease in the individualized PN group (+0.38 SD vs -0.55 SD, P: 0.003). Electrolyte disturbances and biochemical abnormalities did not differ. After matching for age, resulting in comparable groups, no significant differences were demonstrated in WFA, height-for-age, or weight-for-height SD change. CONCLUSIONS: In children with chronic IF, over 2,5 years of age, standardized PN mixtures show a comparable effect on weight, height, and weight for height when compared with individualized PN mixtures. Also, standardized PN mixtures (with added micronutrients) seem noninferior to individualized PN mixtures in terms of electrolyte disturbances and basic biochemical abnormalities. Larger studies are needed to confirm these conclusions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Academical Medical Center medical ethics committee number W18_079 #18.103

Patency of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy in the treatment of malignant gastric outlet obstruction

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasoundguided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) with a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) is a novel, minimally invasive technique in the palliative treatment of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). Several studies have demonstrated feasibility and safety of EUS-GE, but evidence on long-term durability is limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate patency of EUS-GE in treatment of malignant GOO. Patients and Methods An international multicenter study was performed in seven centers in four European countries. Patients who underwent EUS-GE with a LAMS between March 2015 and March 2019 for palliative treatment of symptomatic malignant GOO were included retrospectively. Our main outcome was recurrent obstruction due to LAMS dysfunction; other outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, adverse events (AEs), and survival. Results A total of 45 patients (mean age 69.9 ± 12.3 years and 48.9% male) were included. Median duration of followup was 59 days (interquartile range [IQR] 41–128). Recurrent obstruction occurred in two patients (6.1 %), after 33 and 283 days of follow-up. Technical success was achieved in 39 patients (86.7 %). Clinical success was achieved in 33 patients (73.3 %). AEs occurred in 12 patients (26.7 %), of which five were fatal. Median overall survival was 57 days (IQR 32–114). Conclusions EUS-GE showed a low rate of recurrent obstruction. The relatively high number of fatal AEs underscores the importance of careful implementation of EUSGE in clinical practice

Life-prolonging treatment restrictions and outcomes in patients with cancer and COVID-19:an update from the Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium

AIM OF THE STUDY: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic significantly impacted cancer care. In this study, clinical patient characteristics related to COVID-19 outcomes and advanced care planning, in terms of non-oncological treatment restrictions (e.g. do-not-resuscitate codes), were studied in patients with cancer and COVID-19. METHODS: The Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium registry was launched in March 2020 in 45 hospitals in the Netherlands, primarily to identify risk factors of a severe COVID-19 outcome in patients with cancer. Here, an updated analysis of the registry was performed, and treatment restrictions (e.g. do-not-intubate codes) were studied in relation to COVID-19 outcomes in patients with cancer. Oncological treatment restrictions were not taken into account. RESULTS: Between 27th March 2020 and 4th February 2021, 1360 patients with cancer and COVID-19 were registered. Follow-up data of 830 patients could be validated for this analysis. Overall, 230 of 830 (27.7%) patients died of COVID-19, and 60% of the remaining 600 patients with resolved COVID-19 were admitted to the hospital. Patients with haematological malignancies or lung cancer had a higher risk of a fatal outcome than other solid tumours. No correlation between anticancer therapies and the risk of a fatal COVID-19 outcome was found. In terms of end-of-life communication, 50% of all patients had restrictions regarding life-prolonging treatment (e.g. do-not-intubate codes). Most identified patients with treatment restrictions had risk factors associated with fatal COVID-19 outcome. CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of a negative impact of anticancer therapies on COVID-19 outcomes. Timely end-of-life communication as part of advanced care planning could save patients from prolonged suffering and decrease burden in intensive care units. Early discussion of treatment restrictions should therefore be part of routine oncological care, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic

Dutch Oncology COVID-19 consortium:Outcome of COVID-19 in patients with cancer in a nationwide cohort study

Aim of the study: Patients with cancer might have an increased risk for severe outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To identify risk factors associated with a worse outcome of COVID-19, a nationwide registry was developed for patients with cancer and COVID-19. Methods: This observational cohort study has been designed as a quality of care registry and is executed by the Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium (DOCC), a nationwide collaboration of oncology physicians in the Netherlands. A questionnaire has been developed to collect pseudonymised patient data on patients' characteristics, cancer diagnosis and treatment. All patients with COVID-19 and a cancer diagnosis or treatment in the past 5 years are eligible. Results: Between March 27th and May 4th, 442 patients were registered. For this first analysis, 351 patients were included of whom 114 patients died. In multivariable analyses, age ≥65 years (p < 0.001), male gender (p = 0.035), prior or other malignancy (p = 0.045) and active diagnosis of haematological malignancy (p = 0.046) or lung cancer (p = 0.003) were independent risk factors for a fatal outcome of COVID-19. In a subgroup analysis of patients with active malignancy, the risk for a fatal outcome was mainly determined by tumour type (haematological malignancy or lung cancer) and age (≥65 years). Conclusion: The findings in this registry indicate that patients with a haematological malignancy or lung cancer have an increased risk of a worse outcome of COVID-19. During the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, these vulnerable patients should avoid exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, whereas treatment adjustments and prioritising vaccination, when available, should also be considered