Feeding strategies in pediatric cancer patients with gastrointestinal mucositis: a multicenter prospective observational study and international survey.

INTRODUCTION: Currently, there is no adequate prevention or treatment for both oral and gastrointestinal mucositis induced by chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. Supportive care of symptoms plays a primary role during mucositis in the pediatric clinical setting. We aimed to get insight in the currently used feeding strategies in clinical practice in pediatric cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced mucositis. METHODS: A prospective observational study was performed to identify feeding strategies after chemotherapy courses causing mucositis in almost all patients at the University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), the Academic Medical Center Amsterdam (AMC), and the Princess Maxima Center Utrecht (PMC). Consecutive patients, aged 0-18 years, either diagnosed with B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL) or scheduled for autologous stem cell transplantation (SCT) between April 2015 and September 2016 were included in this study. In addition to the observational study in the Netherlands, an international online questionnaire was conducted for pediatric oncology centers. RESULTS: A total of 13 patients were included, after 21 chemotherapy courses. No nutritional support was administered after 23.8% courses, tube feeding after 19.0% of the courses, TPN in 19.0% of courses, and 38.1% received a combination of tube feeding and TPN. The international survey revealed that 63.2% of the centers administered tube feeding as first choice, 31.6% administered only TPN as first choice, and one center administered a combination as first choice. CONCLUSIONS: There is a variability in feeding strategies in the clinical practice both in the Netherlands as well as worldwide. This study is a basis for future studies in this important clinical field to develop clinical trials comparing tube feeding and TPN both in adult and pediatric patients.

Effect of Oral Insulin on the Severity and Recovery of Methotrexate-Induced Gastrointestinal Mucositis in the Rat.

OBJECTIVES: Gastrointestinal (GI) mucositis is an adverse-effect of chemo- and radiotherapy. Oral insulin has been suggested as possible intestinal growth factor and possible intervention for GI mucositis. We aimed to determine the effect of oral insulin on the severity and recovery of mucositis in a methotrexate (MTX)-induced GI mucositis rat model. METHODS: Male Wistar rats (n = 24) received a single injection of 60 mg/kg MTX intravenously at day 0. From day -3 oral insulin was added to the drinking water. Group MTX received normal drinking water, group MTX+INS0.5 received 0.5 U/mL insulin, and group MTX+INS1 received 1 U/mL insulin in drinking water. The severity of mucositis was determined by intake, bodyweight, illness, and plasma citrulline. In the recovery phase, the function of the gut was tested with an oral glucose tolerance test, and villus and crypt length of the small intestine were measured. RESULTS: MTX-induced mucositis in all 3 groups and oral insulin did not cause a change in the severity of mucositis, with comparable bodyweight, food intake, and water intake. Oral insulin did not alter the enterocyte mass, determined with plasma citrulline. The glucose level after bolus was higher in the MTX group than the MTX+INS1 group (P < 0.05). Histology was not significant different between all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Oral insulin does not alter the severity or the acceleration of recovery of mucositis. Therefore, we conclude that it is not useful to further study oral insulin as possible intervention to prevent or treat chemotherapy-induced GI mucositis.

Tumor Necrosis Factor-Alpha Inhibitor Etanercept Does Not Alter Methotrexate-Induced Gastrointestinal Mucositis in Rats.

OBJECTIVES: Gastrointestinal (GI) mucositis is a severe adverse effect of chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Proinflammatory cytokines are thought to play an important role in the pathophysiology of GI mucositis. We aimed to determine the effect of the tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) inhibitor etanercept on the severity of mucositis in a previously established methotrexate (MTX)-induced GI mucositis rat model. METHODS: Male Wistar rats received 60 mg/kg MTX on day 0 intravenously. Rats were treated daily with either etanercept (TNF-α inhibitor) 5 mg/kg or NaCl 0.9% subcutaneously from day -3 till day 3. Control rats received NaCl 0.9% intravenously and etanercept subcutaneously. The severity of mucositis was determined by intake, bodyweight, plasma citrulline, and by a function test (absorption of an oral glucose bolus). On day 4 and day 10 rats were terminated. Villus length, crypt length, intestinal myeloperoxidase, and plasma etanercept levels were determined. RESULTS: The administration of MTX induced mucositis in all rats. Etanercept did not cause a change in the degree of mucositis. Bodyweight, intake, and glucose levels were not altered by etanercept; villus length was comparable; and there was no difference in myeloperoxidase and citrulline level. Etanercept levels in plasma were significantly increased in the etanercept rats (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: TNF-α inhibitor etanercept did not alter the severity of mucositis in the rat, suggesting that targeting only the inflammatory pathway of TNF-α is not effective for decreasing the severity of GI mucositis induced by high-dose MTX. Etanercept alone is not useful for the treatment of MTX-induced GI mucositis.

Effect of minimal enteral feeding on recovery in a methotrexate-induced gastrointestinal mucositis rat model.

PURPOSE: Patients suffering from gastrointestinal mucositis often receive parenteral nutrition as nutritional support. However, the absence of enteral nutrition might not be beneficial for the intestine. We aimed to determine the feasibility of minimal enteral feeding (MEF) administration in a methotrexate (MTX)-induced mucositis rat model and thereby determine the effect of MEF on recovery. METHODS: Male Wistar rats were attached to swivel systems from day 1 to 5 after 45 mg/kg MTX IV injection. The MTX group continued ad libitum feeding, and the MTX + MEF group continued ad libitum feeding and received from day 1 to 5 continuously MEF. MEF consisted of 20% of their normal caloric intake. We measured body weight, intake, and plasma citrulline. At day 10, the rats were terminated and villus and crypt length were measured. RESULTS: The administration of MEF caused no increased severity of mucositis phenotype, with comparable caloric intake, body weight, and plasma citrulline during mucositis. The recovery of plasma citrulline levels was not different between both groups. At day 7 and 8, the MTX + MEF group gained significantly more weight (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively), and at day 8 and 9 the total caloric intake was significantly increased (p < 0.01 and p < 0.05, respectively) compared to the MTX group. At day 10, the rats from the MTX + MEF group showed a significant increase in jejunal villus length compared to the MTX group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study in which the feasibility of MEF administration during chemotherapy-induced mucositis was determined. This study indicates that MEF administration is feasible during mucositis and suggests that MEF accelerates recovery after MTX-induced mucositis.

Risk analysis, diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal mucositis in pediatric cancer patients.

Mucositis is a complex inflammatory reaction of the mucous membranes of the alimentary tract upon chemotherapy and radiotherapy treatment in oncology patients. Mucositis can be subdivided in oral and gastrointestinal mucositis (GI mucositis). The damage to the gastrointestinal tract compromises the intestinal function and thereby the nutritional status and the quality of life, and eventually affects survival. The literature on GI mucositis focuses mainly on adults. This review focuses on data available on GI mucositis in pediatric cancer patients. An evaluation of the clinical presentation and consequences of GI mucositis in children is outlined. The review summarizes key issues for clinicians with respect to risk analysis for developing mucositis and the diagnosis of this condition in children. Information on these issues is obtained from clinical trials in children and adults, and from animal models. Diagnostic tools and assessment of severity of GI mucositis in children is elaborated on. Furthermore, the clinical management of the symptoms and consequences of GI mucositis in children, with specific focus on nutritional support, are discussed.