Evidence Hub

Nutritional support during the hospital stay reduces mortality in patients with different types of cancers: Secondary analysis of a prospective randomized trial

L. Bargetzi, C. Brack, J. Herrmann, Annika Bargetzi, L. Hersberger, M. Bargetzi, N. Kaegi-Braun, P. Tribolet et al.

Annals of Oncology, 2021

506 participants · 149 citations

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Nutritional support in patients with cancer aims at improving quality of life. Whether use of nutritional support is also effective in improving clinical outcomes remains understudied.

METHODS

In this preplanned secondary analysis of patients with cancer included in a prospective, randomized-controlled, Swiss, multicenter trial (EFFORT), we compared protocol-guided individualized nutritional support (intervention group) to standard hospital food (control group) regarding mortality at 30-day (primary endpoint) and other clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

We analyzed 506 patients with a main admission diagnosis of cancer, including lung cancer (n=113), gastrointestinal tumors (n=84), hematological malignancies (n=108) and other types of cancer (n=201). Nutritional risk based on Nutritional Risk Screening [NRS 2002] was an independent predictor for mortality over 180 days with a (age-, sex-, center-, type of cancer-, tumor activity- and treatment-) adjusted hazard ratio of 1.29 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.54; p=0.004) per point increase in NRS. In the 30-day follow-up period, 50 patients (19.9%) died in the control group compared to 36 (14.1%) in the intervention group resulting in an adjusted odds ratio of 0.57 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.94; p=0.027). Interaction tests did not show significant differences in mortality across the cancer type subgroups. Nutritional support also significantly improved functional outcomes and quality of life measures.

CONCLUSION

Compared to usual hospital…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 506 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free