Integral nutritional approach to the care of cancer patients: results from a Delphi panel

The role of the nutrition in malnourished cancer patients: Revisiting an old dilemma

BACKGROUND & AIMS

GLIM definition of malnutrition is recognised all over the world and, when is referring to cancer, it specifies that weight or muscle loss are associated with an inflammatory status. However, the real-world practice shows that GLIM definition cannot encompass all the wide and heterogenous clinical presentations of cancer patients with malnutrition, which involves many other drivers beyond inflammation. Moreover, placing an excessive emphasis on the inflammation can overshadow, in the clinical practice, the role of the nutritional support in malnourished cancer patients. The aim of this paper is not to criticize the rationale of the GLIM definition of cancer cachexia, but to show the complexity and heterogeneity of malnutrition of cancer patients and reasons why nutritional support should deserve such a better consideration among the oncologists.

METHODS

Literature pertinent to pathophysiology of malnutrition of cancer patients is scrutinised and reasons for the frequent underuse of nutritional support are critically analysed.

RESULTS

The appraisal of the literature shows that there are various pathophysiological patterns of malnutrition among cancer patients and inflammatory markers are not universally present in weight-losing cancer patients. Inflammation alone does not account for weight loss in all cancer patients and factors other than inflammation can drive hypophagia and weight loss, and hypophagia appears to be a primary catalyst for weight loss. Furthermore, malnutrition may be the consequence of the presence of several Nutrition Impact Symptoms or of the oncologic therapy. The nutritional support may fail to show benefits in malnourished cancer patients because the golden standard to validate a therapy relies on RCT, but it is ethically impossible to have an unfed control group of malnourished patients. Furthermore, nutritional interventions often fell short of the optimal standards, adherence to treatment plans was often poor, nutritional support was mainly reserved for very advanced patients and the primary endpoints of the studies on nutritional support were sometimes unrealistic.

CONCLUSION

There is a gap between the suggestion of the guidelines which advocate the use of nutritional support to improve the compliance of patients facing intensive oncologic treatments or to prevent an early demise when patients enter a chronic phase of slow nutritional deterioration, and the poor use of nutrition in the real-world practice. This requires a higher level of awareness of the oncologists concerning the reasons for the lacking evidence of efficacy of the nutritional support and an understanding of its potential contribute to improve the outcome of the patients. Finally, this paper calls for a change of the oncologist's approach to the cancer patient, from only focusing on the cure of the tumour to taking care of the patient as a whole.

Clinical usefulness of the patient-generated subjective global assessment short form© for nutritional screening in patients with head and neck cancer: a multicentric study

Nutritional screening and assessment are considered essential steps in nutritional care for cancer patients, malnutrition remains underreported in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to analyse the clinical usefulness of the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment short form (PG-SGA SF©) for nutritional screening in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). This is a multicentre, cross-sectional study involving patients with HNC. The final score of the PG-SGA SF© was obtained and the nutritional status was diagnosed using the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA)®, classifying them as well-nourished or malnourished. Receiver operating characteristic curve, ordinal logistic regression, and C-statistic were used. In total, 353 patients with HNC were enrolled and the prevalence of malnutrition, according to the PG-SGA®, was 64.02% and the median final score of PG-SGA SF© was 11 points. The final score of the PG-SGA SF© had high accuracy (area under the curve = 0.915), and scores ≥9 had the best performance in diagnosing malnutrition. PG-SGA SF© final score ≥9 was associated with malnutrition (odds ratio = 28.32, 95% confidence interval= 15.98-50.17), with excellent discriminatory power (C-statistic = 0.872). In conclusion, the PG-SGA SF© demonstrated excellent performance for nutritional screening in patients with HNC. Given that it is a simple instrument that is faster to administer than the PG-SGA®, we recommend its use in clinical practice among such patients.

Sipping as a Nutritional Supplement in Ambulatory Palliative Oncology Care: A Pilot Study with Noninvasive Methods

Objective: The implementation of nutritional support is a basic need of patients in palliative oncological care. This pilot study optimized the use of sipping to improve the nutritional status of cancer patients in palliative care. Materials and Method: The pilot study included 63 patients, 61.3 years of age on average (range: 32-82 years of age). The patients were assigned to either group A (no nutritional support n = 39 patients) or group B (sipping as nutritional support n = 24 patients). The patients were evaluated through by noninvasive methods: body weight, waist and arm circumference, and triceps skinfold, bioimpedance analysis, and dynamometry. Quality of life was assessed through modified questionnaires. Results: In contrast with group A, group B did not have a significant weight loss, that is, A: 81.9 ± 15.8-80.5 ± 15.8 kg (P = .028) and B: 73.9 ± 14.9-73 ± 16 kg. Body mass index A: 29 ± 5-28.5 ± 5 kg/m2 (P = .007) and B: 25.3 ± 4.7-25 ± 4.9 kg/m2 (P = .614). Waist circumference A: 93.5 ± 15.1-92.5 ± 14.8 cm (P = .008) and B: 80.1 ± 13.2-80.6 ± 12.3 cm (P = .234). Triceps skinfold A: 12.3 ± 7.2-11 ± 6.7 mm (P = .001) and B: 8.2 ± 6.1-7.9 ± 5.7 mm (P = .207). Fat free mass A: 54.8 ± 11.5-52.8 ± 11.6 kg (P = .018) and B: 54.7 ± 10.9-52.8 ± 11.5 kg (P = .207). Significantly lower dynamometer values were recorded in both groups; A: 25.6 ± 10.4-23.1 ± 10.3 kg (P = .010) and B: 27.4 ± 9.9-24.3 ± 9.1 kg (P = .009). In contrast to group B, the patients in group A showed slight variations in their health status, thus decreasing their scores into the significance limit (P = .072). Conclusion: Our results suggest that providing nutritional support in the form of sipping (∼12 g proteins, 300 kcal) on a daily basis prevents the loss of active tissue mass in palliative oncology patients. Based on these results, we recommend the inclusion of this simple nutritional support to prevent malnutrition in cancer patients in palliative care. The clinical study was registered by the internal ethics committee under the heading of its approval - Institutional Ethics Committee of the Hradec Králové Faculty Hospital, number 201311S2OP.

Expert design thinking workshops to analyze users' perceived applicability of NUTRI-ONCOCARE algorithm to prevent and treat malnutrition in cancer patients under routine clinical practice conditions in Spain: the ALLIANCE study

PURPOSE

NUTRI-ONCOCARE algorithm has been developed to identify and treat patients with solid tumors who are at risk of malnutrition. The present study is aimed at analyzing users' opinion about this new tool and at assessing whether it is perceived as useful to achieve the behavioral change required for a successful integration of nutritional assessment into routine cancer care.

METHODS

Design thinking Double Diamond process was applied. A multidisciplinary team composed of ten potential end-users (four oncologists, three endocrinologists, one nutritionist, and two hospital pharmacists) participated in three different workshops aiming to analyze the different tasks included within the NUTRI-ONCOCARE algorithm.

RESULTS

Users agreed on the need to perform nutritional assessment around cancer diagnosis and through the course of the disease using standardized tools included in hospital nutritional protocols and involving healthcare professionals with nutrition expertise. Nutritional evaluation and intervention should be individual and comprehensive, considering not only nutritional parameters but also patients' functional status. According to participants' opinion, the implementation of nutritional screening in routine clinical practice is limited by the lack of time and staff to conduct nutritional assessments, the low level of nutrition expert participation, and the poor support provided by hospital managers, which are often unaware of nutrition's impact in cancer care.

CONCLUSIONS

Experts recognized the importance of considering nutritional status in cancer patients and identified the opportunity provided by the NUTRI-ONCOCARE algorithm for this purpose, as it meets main requirements for being used routinely in clinical practice.

Evaluation of Nutritional Interventions in the Care Plan for Cancer Patients: The NOA Project

The NOA (Oncological Nutrition in Andalusia) project analyses the degree of integration and areas of improvement in implementing nutritional support in the care plans of cancer patients in Andalusia. The aim was to analyse nutritional interventions for better care of cancer patients and for the improvement of the management of malnutrition in cancer. A prospective evaluation of the implementation of two areas of improvement in nutrition was conducted in three hospitals. Data were collected from each hospital over a six-month period using an online platform. A standardised care plan was designed for hospitals in Andalusia, in which proposed improvements were devised and prioritised, selecting nutritional screening in oncology services and the participation of the Nutrition Support Team (NST) on the tumour boards, as well as the assessment of the patients presented at these sessions. Our results indicated an increase in the number of medical records with nutritional evaluation results six months later, regardless of the type of tumour or hospitalisation; and there was greater participation of the NST on the tumour boards, mainly for head and neck and oesophagogastric cases. Solutions for improvement have been pinpointed and implemented that have positively impacted the nutritional care plan in the course of oncological disease.

Nutritional management of cancer patients in clinical practice in Spain: patients' and multidisciplinary health care professionals' perceptions

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Malnutrition is a prevalent problem in patients with cancer and is associated with poor prognosis. The European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) recommends the provision of nutritional support and evaluation. This study aims to describe the nutritional management of patients with cancer, including assessment of adherence, from the perspective of both patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs).

SUBJECTS/METHODS

A cross-sectional descriptive observational study was carried out through two surveys addressed to patients and HCPs.

RESULTS

A total of 230 cancer patients and 461 HCPs completed the questionnaire. The survey found 55.0% of patients experienced eating problems during treatment and 64.0% reported sequelae affecting nourishment. However, 60.1% of patients and 42.6% of HCPs indicated that nutritional status is not generally assessed. While 86.6% of HCPs stated that nutritional information is provided to patients, only 33.5% of patients reported having received it. Regarding nutritional adherence, 87.4% of HCPs stated that it is assessed whereas only 49.2% of patients receiving nutritional supplements confirmed this. General discomfort or gastrointestinal problems were the main issues hampering correct adherence perceived by both patients (41.8%) and HCPs (95.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrate that different perceptions exist between patients and HCPs about nutritional management in cancer and suggests that in Spain nutritional approach is suboptimal in terms of screening/assessment of malnutrition, nutritional information provided to the patient, nutritional intervention and assessment of adherence to nutritional support. Therefore, measure should be taken to foster the adoption of ESPEN recommendations in clinical practice and to promote nutritional education of HCPs.

Knowledge and Practices of Digestive Surgeons concerning Specialized Nutritional Support in Cancer Patients: A Survey Study

A survey study based on a 21-item questionnaire was conducted to assess knowledge and practices of digestive surgeons focused on nutritional support in gastrointestinal cancer patients. At least 5 staff digestive surgeons from 25 tertiary care hospitals throughout Spain were invited to participate and 116 accepted. Malnutrition was correctly defined by 81.9% of participants. In patients undergoing major abdominal surgery, 55.2% considered that preoperative nutritional support is indicated in all patients with malnutrition for a period of 7-14 days. For the diagnosis of malnutrition, only 18.1% of participants selected unintentional weight loss together with a fasting or semi-fasting period of more than one week. Regarding the advantages of enteral infusion, 93.7% of participants considered preservation of the integrity of the intestinal mucosa and barrier function, and in relation to peripheral parenteral nutrition, 86.2% selected the definition of nutrient infusion through a peripheral vein and 81.9% its indication for less than 7 days. Digestive surgeons had a limited knowledge of basic aspects of clinical nutrition in cancer patients, but there was some variability regarding clinical practice in individual cases. These findings indicate the need to develop standardized clinical protocols as well as a national consensus on nutrition support in cancer patients.

Malnutrition management in oncology: An expert view on controversial issues and future perspectives

Cancer and anticancer treatments can lead to several negative side effects, including malnutrition. Despite the recognized need for adequate nutritional support in cancer patients, in daily clinical practice, nutrition is still not considered one of the first aspects to be considered. Malnutrition negatively affects the clinical outcomes, treatment response, and overall survival of cancer patients. In this study, three of the most controversial issues related to malnutrition, which emerged during an Italian Consensus Conference, were addressed specifically for patients with head and neck as well as gastrointestinal cancer. The timing of nutritional evaluation and intervention, extension of the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS^®) protocols, and cost-effectiveness of nutritional interventions have been considered. This study aimed to illustrate the state-of-the art of each issue and hypothesize future perspectives and actions to be taken, trying to suggest a new nutritional management model for cancer patients in Italy that overcomes the critical issues encountered. Of note, the timely diagnosis of nutritional issue appears to be essential to ensure the correct management of malnourished cancer patients as well as those who are at high risk of malnutrition. Standardized protocols, screening tests, and the inclusion of nutritional parameters in patient medical records would help to achieve good clinical outcomes. Finally, appropriate nutritional support is also associated with cost savings, and it seems necessary to promote its clinical and economic value to obtain improvements in both outcomes and management costs.

The Determination of a Consensus Nutritional Approach for Cancer Patients in Spain Using the Delphi Methodology

Malnutrition has a multifactorial origin and can be caused by cancer. This study determined the consensus of a panel of experts on the nutritional approach for cancer patients in Spain using a multidisciplinary approach. Using the Delphi methodology, a 74-question questionnaire was prepared and sent to 46 experts. The areas of knowledge addressed were the nutritional status of the cancer patient, nutritional screening, nutritional therapy, patient referral, and multidisciplinary care. A total of 91.7% of the experts agreed with the questions posed on nutritional status, 60.0% with those on nutritional screening, 76.7% with those on nutritional therapy, and the entire panel of experts agreed with the questions posed on patient referral and multidisciplinary care. The experts agreed upon a high prevalence of malnutrition among cancer patients in Spain. Unlike medical and radiation oncologists, medical nutrition specialists believe that body composition assessment should not be carried out in all types of cancer patients during nutritional screening and that interventions can be conducted outside the oncology clinic. In general, it is recommended that nursing staff routinely perform nutritional screening before starting cancer treatment. It is necessary to develop a multidisciplinary action protocol that includes nutritional and/or sarcopenia screening.

[Opinions and experiences of healthcare professionals in the nutritional management of oncology patients: the ONA study]

OBJECTIVES

an inadequate approach to prevent malnutrition in cancer patients may worsen their quality of life and reduce their response to treatment. This study aims to describe the nutritional management of cancer patients in clinical practice, as well as the opinions of the healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved.

METHODS

this was an observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study addressed to HCPs in the Spanish healthcare setting. The online questionnaire was designed based on a literature review, one focus group of patients (n = 6), and the experience of the multidisciplinary scientific committee (n = 5), and was distributed by the scientific societies endorsing the study.

RESULTS

a total of 461 HCPs answered the survey. Most of them considered that a nutrition expert (95.0 %) is essential for the nutritional management of patients. However, 22.8 % of HCPs did not have access to this expert, and only 49.0 % had received training. Nutritional screening or patient referral for screening was performed by 58.4 % of HCPs. Of the total of HCPs, 86.6 % stated that nutritional information is provided to patients and considered them moderately satisfied with the information received. In malnourished patients or in those at risk of malnutrition, a complete nutritional assessment was performed by HCPs (73.1 %). Most HCPs (87.4 %) reported prescribing or recommending nutritional support if needed, and assessing adherence (86.8 %).

CONCLUSIONS

despite malnutrition being a common problem in cancer patients, almost half of professionals do not perform any nutritional screening. In addition, patient information and assessment of nutritional adherence appear to be suboptimal.

The Clinical Value of Nutritional Care before and during Active Cancer Treatment

Malnutrition and muscle wasting are frequently reported in cancer patients, either linked to the tumor itself or caused by oncologic therapies. Understanding the value of nutritional care during cancer treatment remains crucial. In fact, cancer-associated sarcopenia plays a key role in determining higher rates of morbidity, mortality, treatment-induced toxicities, prolonged hospitalizations and reduced adherence to anticancer treatment, worsening quality of life and survival. Planning baseline screening to intercept nutritional troubles earlier, organizing timely reassessments, and providing adequate counselling and dietary support, healthcare professional may positively interfere with this process and improve patients' overall outcomes during the whole disease course. Several screening tools have been proposed for this purpose. Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS), Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), Patient Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) are the most common studied. Interestingly, second-level tools including skeletal muscle index (SMI) and bioelectric impedance analysis (BIA) provide a more precise assessment of body composition, even if they are more complex. However, nutritional assessment is not currently used in clinical practice and procedures must be standardized in order to improve the efficacy of standard chemotherapy, targeted agents or even checkpoint inhibitors that is potentially linked with the patients' nutritional status. In the present review, we will discuss about malnutrition and the importance of an early nutritional assessment during chemotherapy and treatment with novel checkpoint inhibitors, in order to prevent treatment-induced toxicities and to improve survival outcomes.

Evaluation of a protocol to detect malnutrition and provide nutritional care for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy

Patients with cancer frequently experience malnutrition, which is associated with higher rates of morbidity and mortality. Therefore, the implementation of strategies for its early detection and for intervention should improve the evolution of these patients. Our study aim is to design and implement a protocol for outpatients starting chemotherapy, by means of which any malnutrition can be identified and treated at an early stage. Before starting chemotherapy for patients with cancer, a complete assessment was made of their nutritional status, using the Nutriscore screening tool. When nutritional risk was detected, an interventional protocol was applied. Of 234 patients included in the study group, 84 (36%) required an individualised nutritional approach: 27 (32.1%) presented high nutritional risk, 12 had a Nutriscore result ≥ 5 and 45 experienced weight loss during chemotherapy. Among this population, the mean weight loss (with respect to normal weight) on inclusion in the study was - 3.6% ± 8.2. By the end of the chemotherapy, the mean weight gain was 0% ± 7.3 (p < 0.001) and 71.0% of the patients had experienced weight gain or maintenance, with respect to the initial weight. More than a third of cancer patients who start chemotherapy are candidates for early nutritional intervention. This finding highlights the importance of early identification of patients at risk in order to improve the efficacy of nutritional interventions, regardless of the stage of the disease.

Clinical characteristics and predictive factors of survival of 761 cancer patients on home parenteral nutrition: A prospective, cohort study

BACKGROUND

Robust data reporting the survival of cancer patients on home parenteral nutrition (HPN) are lacking. The aim of this prospective, cohort study was to investigate clinical characteristics, predictive factors, and overall survival (OS) of adult-malnourished cancer patients eligible for HPN according to the European guideline recommendations.

METHODS

During the study period, 1658 cancer patients were consecutively evaluated in a tertiary university hospital. Of these, 761 who received HPN were grouped into four cohorts according to the provision of supplemental PN (SPN) or total (TPN) and whether they received chemotherapy (CT⁺ or CT^- ): SPN/CT⁺ (n = 376), TPN/CT⁺ (n = 99), SPN/CT^- (n = 191), and TPN/CT^- (n = 95). Patient demographics, nutritional status, cancer-related characteristics, and prognostic scores assessed at HPN start. The primary outcome was OS.

RESULTS

Median OS was 8.9, 4.3, 5.7, and 2.2 months for the SPN/CT⁺ , TPN/CT⁺ , SPN/CT^- , and TPN/CT^- cohorts, respectively. In multivariable analysis, predictors showing significant association with decreased survival were patient cohorts, modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (1 and 2 scores), weight loss (>15%) in the 3 months before HPN start, and TNM IV stage while protective factors of survival were Karnofsky Performance Status (>50), albumin level (>3.5 g/dL), oral protein intake, BMI (>20.5), and weight at HPN start.

CONCLUSION

For the first time, in four different cohorts of cancer patients on HPN, clinical characteristics and survival were compared. This large study showed that survival is significantly correlated with patient characteristics at HPN start and that the presence of favorable factors may determine even a fourfold increase in survival. These data are expected to assist physicians in the appropriate prescription of HPN.

Impact on Health-Related Quality of Life of Parenteral Nutrition for Patients with Advanced Cancer Cachexia: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Malnutrition worsens health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and the prognosis of patients with advanced cancer. This study aimed to assess the clinical benefits of parenteral nutrition (PN) over oral feeding (OF) for patients with advanced cancer cachexia and without intestinal impairment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this prospective multicentric randomized controlled study, patients with advanced cancer and malnutrition were randomly assigned to optimized nutritional care with or without supplemental PN. Zelen's method was used for randomization to facilitate inclusions. Nutritional and performance status and HRQoL using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C15-PAL questionnaire were evaluated at baseline and monthly until death. Primary endpoint was HRQoL deterioration-free survival (DFS) defined as a definitive deterioration of ≥10 points compared with baseline, or death.

RESULTS

Among the 148 randomized patients, 48 patients were in the experimental arm with PN, 63 patients were in the control arm with OF only, and 37 patients were not included because of early withdrawal or refused consent. In an intent to treat analysis, there was no difference in HRQoL DFS between the PN arm or OF arm for the three targeted dimensions: global health (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-1.94; p = .18), physical functioning (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.06-2.35; p = .024), and fatigue (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.80-1.77; p = .40); there was a negative trend for overall survival among patients in the PN arm. In as treated analysis, serious adverse events (mainly infectious) were more frequent in the PN arm than in the OF arm (p = .01).

CONCLUSION

PN improved neither HRQoL nor survival and induced more serious adverse events than OF among patients with advanced cancer and malnutrition. Clinical trial identification number. NCT02151214 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This clinical trial showed that parenteral nutrition improved neither quality of life nor survival and generated more serious adverse events than oral feeding only among patients with advanced cancer cachexia and no intestinal impairment. Parenteral nutrition should not be prescribed for patients with advanced cancer, cachexia, and no intestinal failure when life expectancy is shorter than 3 months. Further studies are needed to assess the useful period with a potential benefit of artificial nutrition for patients with advanced cancer.

Refeeding syndrome in hematological cancer patients - current approach

Introduction: According to estimates based on the GLOBOCAN database of the International Agency for Research on Cancer, in 2018 alone, 18 100 000 cancers were globally diagnosed. Importantly, the majority of cancer patients experience unintended weight loss that leads to many adverse clinical consequences, including malnutrition and cancer cachexia. At the same time, each nutritional intervention must be carried out individually, as it can lead to critical complications, resulting in a threat to the health and life of the cachectic patient. An example of this type of risk is refeeding syndrome.Areas covered: Three factors seem to be crucial in this case: early identification of patients at risk of malnutrition, the introduction of an individualized diet regimen and constant monitoring of nutritional intervention. It seems equally important to spread awareness about the possibility of refeeding syndrome and knowledge about its patomechanisms and consequences among medical staff. This should lead to minimizing the risk of refeeding syndrome.Expert opinion: It should be noted that current guidelines on the pathogenesis, risk factors and methods of prevention and treatment of refeeding syndrome require further modifications, that would harmonize the management regimen in both prevention and therapy of refeeding syndrome.

Sarcopenic Factors May Have No Impact on Outcomes in Ovarian Cancer Patients

Although the prognostic value of sarcopenic factors, such as loss of muscle mass and quality, have been widely reported in patients with cancer during the last decade, the value in those with ovarian cancer remains unclear. Therefore, this study evaluated the prognostic impact of sarcopenic factors in patients with ovarian cancer. We retrospectively evaluated the data of 94 ovarian cancer patients who underwent surgery and chemotherapy at the Shimane University Hospital between March 2006 and 2013. Preoperative computed tomography scan at the level of the third lumbar vertebra was used to evaluate skeletal muscle volume and quality based on the skeletal muscle index (SMI) and intramuscular adipose tissue content (IMAC), respectively. The impact of preoperative SMI and IMAC on outcomes was subsequently investigated. Low SMI and high IMAC were not significantly associated with disease-free survival (p = 0.329 and p = 0.3370, respectively) or poor overall survival (p = 0.921 and p = 0.988, respectively). Neither preoperative low muscle volume nor low muscle quality was a poor prognostic factor in ovarian cancer.

Nutritional Therapy in Cancer Patients Receiving Chemoradiotherapy: Should We Need Stronger Recommendations to Act for Improving Outcomes?

One of the challenges during chemotherapy and radiotherapy is to complete the planned cycles and doses without dose-limiting toxicity. Growing evidence clearly demonstrates the relationship between dose-limiting toxicity and low muscle mass. Moreover, malnutrition leads to low performance status, impaired quality of life, unplanned hospital admissions, and reduced survival.

In the past, the lack of clear and authoritative recommendations and guidelines has meant that oncologists have not always fully appreciated the importance of nutritional therapy in patients receiving anticancer treatments. Therefore, collaboration between oncologists and clinical nutrition specialists needs to be urgently improved.

Recent guidelines from scientific societies and practical recommendations by inter-society consensus documents can be summarized as follows: 1) timely nutritional therapy should be carefully considered if patients undergoing anticancer treatments are malnourished or at risk of malnutrition due to inadequate oral intake; 2) if oral intake is inadequate despite counseling and oral nutritional supplements, supplemental enteral nutrition or, if this is not sufficient or feasible, parenteral nutrition should be considered; 3) home artificial nutrition should be prescribed and regularly monitored using defined protocols developed between oncologists and clinical nutrition specialists; 4) appropriate nutritional management in the context of simultaneous care should become a guaranteed right for all patients with cancer.

The purpose of this review is to provide oncologists with an overview of the aims and current evidence about nutrition in oncology, together with updated practical and concise recommendations on the application of nutritional therapy in cancer patients receiving chemoradiotherapy.

An inclusive, online Delphi process for setting targets for best practice implementation for spinal cord injury

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES

The Spinal Cord Injury Knowledge Mobilization Network is a pan-Canadian community of practice composed of seven rehabilitation hospitals. The goal of this network is to utilize implementation science processes to facilitate the adoption of best practice in spinal cord injury (SCI) rehabilitation. In addition to selecting specific practices for implementation, a key aspect of effective implementation is the engagement of stakeholders in decision-making processes. To achieve this, the network utilized a Delphi process to reach consensus on two pressure ulcer prevention and management practices to be implemented in SCI inpatient rehabilitation. A diverse, multidisciplinary panel of clinicians, researchers, sponsoring agency representatives, and persons with SCI participated in this process.

METHOD

An online Delphi process was conducted in order to prioritize pressure ulcer prevention and management best practice recommendations and performance indicators for implementation. The process was conducted in six stages: (1) steering committee selection; (2) identification and selection of evidence; (3) participant selection and recruitment; (4) survey development; (5) identification of voting criteria; and (6) five rounds of voting.

RESULTS

The Delphi process resulted in the selection of two best practices: (1) comprehensive risk assessment and (2) education for pressure ulcer prevention and management in persons with SCI.

CONCLUSIONS

In this Delphi process, a large expert panel achieved consensus on best practice recommendations and associated performance indicators for implementation. This process was undertaken as a first step towards optimization of service delivery and outcomes for persons with SCI across Canada.