ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Monitoring Response to Home Parenteral Nutrition in Adult Cancer Patients.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Home Cancer Care Research: A Bibliometric and Visualization Analysis (1990-2021).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current guidelines recommend home parenteral nutrition (HPN) for cancer patients with chronic deficiencies of dietary intake or absorption when enteral nutrition is not adequate or feasible in suitable patients. HPN has been shown to slow down progressive weight loss and improve nutritional status, but limited information is available on the monitoring practice of cancer patients on HPN. Clinical management of these patients based only on nutritional status is incomplete. Moreover, some commonly used clinical parameters to monitor patients (weight loss, body weight, body mass index, and oral food intake) do not accurately reflect patient's body composition, while bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a validated tool to properly assess nutritional status on a regular basis. Therefore, patient's monitoring should rely on other affordable indicators such as Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) and modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS) to also assess patient's functional status and prognosis. Finally, catheter-related complications and quality of life represent crucial issues to be monitored over time. The purpose of this narrative review is to describe the role and relevance of monitoring cancer patients on HPN, regardless of whether they are receiving anticancer treatments. These practical tips may be clinically useful to better guide healthcare providers in the nutritional care of these patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.