Association of Baseline Inflammation With Effectiveness of Nutritional Support Among Patients With Disease-Related Malnutrition

Abstract

IMPORTANCE Inflammation is a key driver of malnutrition during illness and is often accompanied by metabolic effects, including insulin resistance and reduction of appetite. However, it still remains unclear if inflammation influences the response to nutritional support among patients with disease-related malnutrition. OBJECTIVE To examine whether patients' baseline inflammatory status is associated with the effect of nutritional support on 30-day mortality. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This is a secondary analysis of the Effect of Early Nutritional Support on Frailty, Functional Outcomes, and Recovery of Malnourished Medical Inpatients Trial (EFFORT), a randomized clinical trial conducted in 8 Swiss hospitals from April 2014 to February 2018. A total of 1950 participants who had C-reactive protein measurements at the time of admission were included in this secondary analysis. Data analysis was conducted between June and July 2019. INTERVENTIONS Hospitalized patients at risk for malnutrition were randomly assigned to receive protocol-guided individualized nutritional support to reach protein and energy goals (intervention group) or standard hospital food (control group). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end point was 30-day mortality. Based on C-reactive protein levels at admission, patients were stratified into groups with low, moderate, or high inflammation (<10 mg/L, 10-100 mg/L, and >100 mg/L, respectively). RESULTS A total of 1950 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 75 [65-83] years; 1025 [52.6%] men) were included; 533 (27.3%) had low levels of inflammation, 894 (45.9%) had moderate levels of inflammation, and 523 (26.8%) had high levels of inflammation. Compared with the control group, patients receiving nutritional support showed a significant reduction in 30-day mortality, regardless of C-reactive protein level (adjusted odds ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43-0.86; P = .005). In the subgroup of patients with high inflammation, there was no beneficial effect of nutritional support (adjusted odds ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.70-2.50; P = .39), providing evidence that inflammation has a significant modifying association (P for interaction = .005). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Based on this secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized trial, a patient's admission inflammatory status was associated with their response to nutritional support. If validated in future clinical trials, nutritional support may need to be individualized based (continued) Key Points Question Does nutritional support have a similar effect on 30-day mortality among patients with high inflammation compared with patients with low or moderate inflammation? Findings In this secondary analysis of a Swiss multicenter trial, including 1950 patients at risk of malnutrition, patients with high levels of inflammation based on their levels of C-reactive protein at admission were not associated with a beneficial effect of nutritional support on 30-day mortality compared with the overall population, suggesting that inflammation has a significan...

The Use of Visceral Proteins as Nutrition Markers: An ASPEN Position Paper

“…Cytokines, produced during inflammation, often result in anorexia, in large part by impairing the ability to digest or absorb nutrients 4 . Hospitalized patients with severe inflammatory responses (defined as C‐reactive protein [CRP] > 100 mg/L) did not demonstrate a strong, measurable response to nutrition support in a large randomized controlled trial 5 . See Figure 1 below.…”

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

“…The trial protocol and the results of the main trial, as well as secondary outcomes, have been published previously. [4,11,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22] The Ethics Committee of Northwest and Central Switzerland (EKNZ) approved the study protocol in January 2014 (EKNZ; 2014_001).…”

Response to “Low albumin levels should be interpreted, but not ignored”

“…3 What is known is that serum albumin is useful as a predictive marker of surgical risk, as highlighted in our position statement. 4 The use of serum albumin as a component of preoperative risk assessment is well documented because of its known relationship with operative morbidity and mortality. 5 In summary, we are saying not that serum albumin should be discarded but rather that it should not be misused.…”