Feasibility of a novel mixed-nutrient supplement in a multimodal prehabilitation intervention for lung cancer patients awaiting surgery: A randomized controlled pilot trial

Access, acceptance and adherence to cancer prehabilitation: a mixed-methods systematic review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review is to better understand access to, acceptance of and adherence to cancer prehabilitation.

METHODS

MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Embase, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, ProQuest Medical Library, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and grey literature were systematically searched for quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies published in English between January 2017 and June 2023. Screening, data extraction and critical appraisal were conducted by two reviewers independently using Covidence™ systematic review software. Data were analysed and synthesised thematically to address the question 'What do we know about access, acceptance and adherence to cancer prehabilitation, particularly among socially deprived and minority ethnic groups?' The protocol is published on PROSPERO CRD42023403776 RESULTS: Searches identified 11,715 records, and 56 studies of variable methodological quality were included: 32 quantitative, 15 qualitative and nine mixed-methods. Analysis identified facilitators and barriers at individual and structural levels, and with interpersonal connections important for prehabilitation access, acceptance and adherence. No study reported analysis of facilitators and barriers to prehabilitation specific to people from ethnic minority communities. One study described health literacy as a barrier to access for people from socioeconomically deprived communities.

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited empirical research of barriers and facilitators to inform improvement in equity of access to cancer prehabilitation.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

To enhance the inclusivity of cancer prehabilitation, adjustments may be needed to accommodate individual characteristics and attention given to structural factors, such as staff training. Interpersonal connections are proposed as a fundamental ingredient for successful prehabilitation.

Towards a common definition of surgical prehabilitation: a scoping review of randomised trials

BACKGROUND

There is no universally accepted definition for surgical prehabilitation. The objectives of this scoping review were to (1) identify how surgical prehabilitation is defined across randomised controlled trials and (2) propose a common definition.

METHODS

The final search was conducted in February 2023 using MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of unimodal or multimodal prehabilitation interventions (nutrition, exercise, and psychological support) lasting at least 7 days in adults undergoing elective surgery. Qualitative data were analysed using summative content analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 76 prehabilitation trials of patients undergoing abdominal (n=26, 34%), orthopaedic (n=20, 26%), thoracic (n=14, 18%), cardiac (n=7, 9%), spinal (n=4, 5%), and other (n=5, 7%) surgeries. Surgical prehabilitation was explicitly defined in more than half of these RCTs (n=42, 55%). Our findings consolidated the following definition: 'Prehabilitation is a process from diagnosis to surgery, consisting of one or more preoperative interventions of exercise, nutrition, psychological strategies and respiratory training, that aims to enhance functional capacity and physiological reserve to allow patients to withstand surgical stressors, improve postoperative outcomes, and facilitate recovery.'

CONCLUSIONS

A common definition is the first step towards standardisation, which is needed to guide future high-quality research and advance the field of prehabilitation. The proposed definition should be further evaluated by international stakeholders to ensure that it is comprehensive and globally accepted.

Outcomes reported in randomised trials of surgical prehabilitation: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Heterogeneity of reported outcomes can impact the certainty of evidence for prehabilitation. The objective of this scoping review was to systematically map outcomes and assessment tools used in trials of surgical prehabilitation.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane were searched in February 2023. Randomised controlled trials of unimodal or multimodal prehabilitation interventions (nutrition, exercise, psychological support) lasting at least 7 days in adults undergoing elective surgery were included. Reported outcomes were classified according to the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research framework.

RESULTS

We included 76 trials, mostly focused on abdominal or orthopaedic surgeries. A total of 50 different outcomes were identified, measured using 184 outcome assessment tools. Observer-reported outcomes were collected in 86% of trials (n=65), with hospital length of stay being most common. Performance outcomes were reported in 80% of trials (n=61), most commonly as exercise capacity assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Clinician-reported outcomes were included in 78% (n=59) of trials and most frequently included postoperative complications with Clavien-Dindo classification. Patient-reported outcomes were reported in 76% (n=58) of trials, with health-related quality of life using the 36- or 12-Item Short Form Survey being most prevalent. Biomarker outcomes were reported in 16% of trials (n=12) most commonly using inflammatory markers assessed with C-reactive protein.

CONCLUSIONS

There is substantial heterogeneity in the reporting of outcomes and assessment tools across surgical prehabilitation trials. Identification of meaningful outcomes, and agreement on appropriate assessment tools, could inform the development of a prehabilitation core outcomes set to harmonise outcome reporting and facilitate meta-analyses.

Preparing for colorectal surgery: a feasibility study of a novel web-based multimodal prehabilitation programme in Western Canada

AIM

Prehabilitation for colorectal cancer has focused on exercise-based interventions that are typically designed by clinicians; however, no research has yet been patient-oriented. The aim of this feasibility study was to test a web-based multimodal prehabilitation intervention (known as PREP prehab) consisting of four components (physical activity, diet, smoking cessation, psychological support) co-designed with five patient partners.

METHOD

A longitudinal, two-armed (website without or with coaching support) feasibility study of 33 patients scheduled for colorectal surgery 2 weeks or more from consent (January-September 2021) in the province of British Columbia, Canada. Descriptive statistics analysed a health-related quality of life questionnaire (EQ5D-5L) at baseline (n = 25) and 3 months postsurgery (n = 21), and a follow-up patient satisfaction survey to determine the acceptability, practicality, demand for and potential efficacy in improving overall health.

RESULTS

Patients had a mean age of 52 years (SD 14 years), 52% were female and they had a mean body mass index of 25 kg m-2 (SD 3.8 kg m-2). Only six patients received a Subjective Global Assessment for being at risk for malnutrition, with three classified as 'severely/moderately' malnourished. The majority (86%) of patients intended to use the prehabilitation website, and nearly three-quarters (71%) visited the website while waiting for surgery. The majority (76%) reported that information, tools and resources provided appropriate support, and 76% indicated they would recommend the PREP prehab programme. About three-quarters (76%) reported setting goals for lifestyle modification: 86% set healthy eating goals, 81% aimed to stay active and 57% sought to reduce stress once a week or more. No patients contacted the team to obtain health coaching, despite broad interest (71%) in receiving active support and 14% reporting they received 'active support'.

CONCLUSION

This web-based multimodal prehabilitation programme was acceptable, practical and well-received by all colorectal surgery patients who viewed the patient-oriented multimodal website. The feasibility of providing active health coaching support requires further investigation.

Reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in prehabilitation: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Inadequate study reporting precludes interpretation of findings, pooling of results in meta-analyses, and delays knowledge translation. While prehabilitation interventions aim to enhance candidacy for surgery, to our knowledge, a review of the quality of reporting in prehabilitation has yet to be conducted. Our objective was to determine the extent to which randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of prehabilitation are reported according to methodological and intervention reporting checklists.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria: RCTs of unimodal or multimodal prehabilitation interventions.

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

search was conducted in March 2022 using MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane.

CHARTING METHODS

identified studies were compared to CONSORT, CERT & Modified CERT, TIDieR, PRESENT, and CONSORT-SPI. An agreement ratio (AR) was defined to evaluate if applicable guideline items were correctly reported. Data were analyzed as frequency (n, %) and mean with standard deviation (SD).

RESULTS

We identified 935 unique articles and included 70 trials published from 1994 to 2022. Most prehabilitation programs comprised exercise-only interventions (n = 40, 57%) and were applied before oncologic surgery (n = 32, 46%). The overall mean AR was 57% (SD: 20.9%). The specific mean ARs were as follows: CONSORT: 71% (SD: 16.3%); TIDieR: 62% (SD:17.7%); CERT: 54% (SD: 16.6%); Modified-CERT: 40% (SD:17.8%); PRESENT: 78% (SD: 8.9); and CONSORT-SPI: 47% (SD: 22.1).

CONCLUSION

Altogether, existing prehabilitation trials report approximately half of the checklist items recommended by methodological and intervention reporting guidelines. Reporting practices may improve with the development of a reporting checklist specific to prehabilitation interventions.

Prehabilitation in the lung cancer pathway: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the third most common type of cancer in the UK. Treatment outcomes are poor and UK deaths from lung cancer are higher than any other cancer. Prehabilitation has shown to be an important means of preparing patients both physically and psychologically for cancer treatment. However, little is understood about the context and mechanisms of prehabilitation that can impact physiological and psychological wellbeing. Our aim was to review and summarise primary research on prehabilitation in the lung cancer pathway using a realist approach.

METHODS

A scoping review of empirical primary research was conducted. Five online medical databases from 2016 - February 2023 were searched. All articles reporting on prehabilitation in lung cancer were included in the review. For this review, prehabilitation was defined as either a uni-modal or multi-modal intervention including exercise, nutrition and/or psychosocial support within a home, community or hospital based setting. A realist framework of context, mechanism and outcome was used to assist with the interpretation of findings.

RESULTS

In total, 31 studies were included in the review, of which, three were published study protocols. Over 95% of studies featured an exercise component as part of a prehabilitation programme. Twenty-six of the studies had a surgical focus. Only two studies reported using theory to underpin the design of this complex intervention. There was large heterogeneity across all studies as well as a lack of clinical trials to provide definitive evidence on the programme design, setting, type of intervention, patient criteria, delivery, duration and outcome measures used.

CONCLUSION

A standardised prehabilitation programme for lung cancer patients does not yet exist. Future lung cancer prehabilitation programmes should take into account patient led values, needs, goals, support structures and beliefs, as these factors can affect the delivery and engagement of interventions. Future research should consider using a conceptual framework to conceptualise the living with and beyond cancer experience to help shape and inform personalised prehabilitation services.

The effect of preoperative behaviour change interventions on pre- and post-surgery health behaviours, health outcomes, and health inequalities in adults: A systematic review and meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Prehabilitation interventions are being delivered across surgical specialities to improve health risk behaviours leading to better surgical outcomes and potentially reduce length of hospital stay. Most previous research has focused on specific surgery specialities and has not considered the impact of interventions on health inequalities, nor whether prehabilitation improves health behaviour risk profiles beyond surgery. The aim of this review was to examine behavioural Prehabilitation interventions across surgeries to inform policy makers and commissioners of the best available evidence.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to determine the effect of behavioural prehabilitation interventions targeting at least one of: smoking behaviour, alcohol use, physical activity, dietary intake (including weight loss interventions) on pre- and post-surgery health behaviours, health outcomes, and health inequalities. The comparator was usual care or no treatment. MEDLINE, PubMed, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Clinical trials and Embase databases were searched from inception to May 2021, and the MEDLINE search was updated twice, most recently in March 2023. Two reviewers independently identified eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Outcomes were length of stay, six-minute walk test, behaviours (smoking, diet, physical activity, weight change, and alcohol), and quality of life. Sixty-seven trials were included; 49 interventions targeted a single behaviour and 18 targeted multiple behaviours. No trials examined effects by equality measures. Length of stay in the intervention group was 1.5 days shorter than the comparator (n = 9 trials, 95% CI -2.6 to -0.4, p = 0.01, I2 83%), although in sensitivity analysis prehabilitation had the most impact in lung cancer patients (-3.5 days). Pre-surgery, there was a mean difference of 31.8 m in the six-minute walk test favouring the prehabilitation group (n = 19 trials, 95% CI 21.2 to 42.4m, I2 55%, P <0.001) and this was sustained to 4-weeks post-surgery (n = 9 trials, mean difference = 34.4m (95%CI 12.8 to 56.0, I2 72%, P = 0.002)). Smoking cessation was greater in the prehabilitation group before surgery (RR 2.9, 95% CI 1.7 to 4.8, I2 84%), and this was sustained at 12 months post-surgery (RR 1.74 (95% CI 1.20 to 2.55, I2 43%, Tau2 0.09, p = 0.004)There was no difference in pre-surgery quality of life (n = 12 trials) or BMI (n = 4 trials).

CONCLUSIONS

Behavioural prehabilitation interventions reduced length of stay by 1.5 days, although in sensitivity analysis the difference was only found for Prehabilitation interventions for lung cancer. Prehabilitation can improve functional capacity and smoking outcomes just before surgery. That improvements in smoking outcomes were sustained at 12-months post-surgery suggests that the surgical encounter holds promise as a teachable moment for longer-term behavioural change. Given the paucity of data on the effects on other behavioural risk factors, more research grounded in behavioural science and with longer-term follow-up is needed to further investigate this potential.

Socioeconomic status influences participation in cancer prehabilitation and preparation for surgical recovery: A pooled retrospective analysis using a validated area-level socioeconomic status metric

BACKGROUND

Prehabilitation employs exercise, nutrition, and psychological interventions to optimize physiological status in preparation for surgery. First, we described the extent to which material deprivation index score (MDIS) influenced prehabilitation participation. Second, we evaluated the extent to which prehabilitation influenced recovery as compared to control.

METHODS

Pooled patient records from prospective multimodal prehabilitation studies in oncologic surgery were retrospectively examined. Patient postal codes were linked to their MDIS, a validated area-level socioeconomic status (SES) metric, as quintiles 1-5 (1 = highest SES). Functional capacity was evaluated with the 6-min walking test (6MWT) at baseline, before, and 8 weeks post-surgery. Influence of prehabilitation on length of hospital stay (LOS) was explored using generalized linear models with a negative binomial distribution adjusted for age, sex, surgical population, and MDIS.

RESULTS

Recruitment records were available from 2014 onwards, yielding 1013 eligible patients for prehabilitation participation with MDIS data. Fewer patients with a low SES enrolled (Q1:62% vs. Q5:47%; P = 0.01) and remained in prehabilitation studies (Q1: 59% vs. Q5: 45%; P = 0.07). Prehabilitation study records were available from 2008 onward, yielding 886 enrolled patients with MDIS data (n = 510 prehabilitation, n = 376 control). Preoperative 6MWT similarly improved by > 20 m in response to prehabilitation across SES strata (P < 0.05). Postoperative 6MWT could not be evaluated due to substantial missing data. Prehabilitation had a significant protective influence on LOS, as compared to control, in unadjusted and adjusted models [adjusted IRR:0.77 (95% CI:0.68 to 0.87; P < 0.001].

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest that prehabilitation is effective across all SES; however, participation across SES quintiles was not equal. Barriers to participation must be identified and addressed. Once these barriers are addressed, prehabilitation may reduce surgical disparities among SES.

Feasibility of Rehabilitation during Chemoradiotherapy among Patients with Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Proof-of-Concept Study

Rehabilitation during chemoradiotherapy (CHRT) might (partly) prevent reduction in physical fitness and nutritional status and could improve treatment tolerance in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The aim of this proof-of-concept study was to investigate the feasibility of a multimodal program for rehabilitation during CHRT. A home-based multimodal rehabilitation program (partly supervised moderate-intensity physical exercise training and nutritional support) during CHRT was developed in collaboration with patients with stage III NSCLC and specialized healthcare professionals. A predetermined number of six patients with stage III NSCLC (aged > 50 years) who underwent CHRT and participated in this program were monitored in detail to assess its feasibility for further development and optimization of the program. The patient’s level of physical functioning (e.g., cardiopulmonary exercise test, six-minute walking test, handgrip strength, body mass index, fat free mass index, energy and protein intake) was evaluated in order to provide personalized advice regarding physical exercise training and nutrition. The program appeared feasible and well-tolerated. All six included patients managed to perform the assessments. Exercise session adherence was high in five patients and low in one patient. The performed exercise intensity was lower than prescribed for all patients. Patients were motivated to complete the home-based rehabilitation program during CHRT. Preliminary effects on physical and nutritional parameters revealed relatively stable values throughout CHRT, with inter-individual variation. Supervised and personalized rehabilitation in patients with stage III NSCLC undergoing CHRT seems feasible when the intensity of the physical exercise training was adjusted to the possibilities and preferences of the patients. Future research should investigate the feasibility of a supervised and personalized rehabilitation program during CHRT with a low-to-moderate exercise intensity with the aim to prevent physical decline during CHRT.

Effects of multimodal prehabilitation on muscle size, myosteatosis, and dietary intake of surgical patients with lung cancer - a randomized feasibility study

Many patients with lung cancer undergo surgery, which can increase the risk for muscle loss, leading to worsened outcomes. A multimodal prehabilitation intervention integrating dietary and muscle assessment may help clinicians better understand changes in these outcomes. This pilot assessed feasibility of multimodal prehabilitation in early-stage surgical lung cancer patients and explored relationships between body composition, muscle characteristics and dietary intake, as well as muscle changes due to prehabilitation. Patients were randomized to one of two groups: multimodal prehabilitation including nutritional supplements (fish oil with vitamin D3 + whey protein with leucine), exercise and relaxation, or standard of care. Physical function, dietary intake and muscle were evaluated at 0 and 4 weeks pre-operatively. Of 87 patients assessed for eligibility, 34 (39%) were randomized and 3 (9%) were lost to follow-up. Median age was 69 years and baseline protein intake was 1.0 g/kg/d. Adherence to exercise (86%) and supplements was high (93%); 3 patients (16%) reported side effects. Supplements significantly increased protein, omega-3 fatty acid, leucine and vitamin D intake. There were no significant changes in muscle characteristics. Multimodal prehabilitation with dietary and muscle analyses proved to be feasible. An adequately powered randomized controlled trial is warranted. ClinicalTrials.gov registration no: NCT04610606. Novelty: • Multimodal prehabilitation incorporating dietary assessment and muscle analysis is feasible for early-stage surgical lung cancer patients. • An adequately powered randomized controlled trial is warranted to further explore functional and post-operative outcomes.