Trial of Supplemental Parenteral Nutrition in Under and Over Weight Critically Ill Patients (TOP-UP) (TOP-UP)
Primary Purpose
Critical Illness, Acute Respiratory Failure
Status
Terminated
Phase
Phase 3
Locations
International
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Olimel (5.7%E / N9E)
Sponsored by
About this trial
This is an interventional prevention trial for Critical Illness focused on measuring Randomized trial, Parental nutrition, Enteral nutrition, Intensive care unit, BMI < 25 or ≥ 35
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
- Critically ill adult patient (≥ 18 years) admitted to ICU
- Has acute respiratory failure (ARF) i.e. expected to remain mechanically ventilated for more than 48 hours
- Expected ICU dependency of 5 or more days
- On or expected to initiate enteral nutrition within 7 days of ICU admission
- BMI <25 or ≥ 35 based on pre-ICU actual or estimated dry weight
Exclusion Criteria:
- >72 hours from admission to ICU to time of consent
- Not expected to survive an additional 48 hrs from screening evaluation
- A lack of commitment to full aggressive care (anticipated withholding or withdrawing treatments in the first week but isolated DNR acceptable)
- Patients already receiving PN at screening
Absence of All gastrointestinal risk factors, defined as:
- High Apache II Score (>20)
- On more than 1 vasopressor or increasing doses or vasopressors
- Receiving continuous infusion of narcotics
- High nasogastric/orogastric output (>500 mL over 24 hours)
- Recent surgery involving esophagus, stomach, or small bowel OR peritoneal contamination with bowel contents
- Pancreatitis
- Multiple gastrointestinal investigations
- Recent history of diarrhea/C. Difficile
- Surgical patients with future surgeries planned
- Ruptured or dissected abdominal aortic aneurysm
- Patients admitted with diabetic ketoacidosis or non-ketotic hyperosmolar coma
- Pregnant or lactating patients
- Patients with clinical fulminant hepatic failure
- Patients with Cirrhosis Child's Class C Liver Disease (except those on a transplant list or transplantable)
- Dedicated port of central line not available
- Known allergy to study nutrients (soy, eggs or olive products)
- Enrolment in another industry sponsored ICU intervention study
Sites / Locations
- University of Colorado DHSC
- Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis
- Mercy Hospital St. Louis
- Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine
- The Ohio State Univsersity Medical Center
- Oregon Health & Science University
- University of Texas Health Science Center
- Erasme University Hospital
- Royal Alexandra Hospital
- University of Alberta
- Grey Nuns Hospital
- Nouvel Hôpital Civil
Arms of the Study
Arm 1
Arm 2
Arm Type
Experimental
No Intervention
Arm Label
Enteral Nutrition + Parenteral Nutrition
Enteral Nutrition Only
Arm Description
Enteral nutrition with the addition of parenteral supplementation (Olimel 5.7%E/N9E).
Enteral nutrition only - no intervention
Outcomes
Primary Outcome Measures
Calorie & Protein Intake 7 Days Post Randomization
Amount of calories & protein received as a percentage of prescribed.
Calorie & Protein Intake in First 27 Days
Amount of calories & protein received as a percentage of prescribed.
Secondary Outcome Measures
6 Month Mortality
Kaplan-Meier estimate.
ICU Mortality
Hospital Mortality
Duration of ICU Stay
Duration of Hospital Stay
Duration of Mechanical Ventilation
Development of ICU-acquired Infections
SF36-Physical Functioning Domain
The SF-36 physical function domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF-36 Physical Functioning Domain
The SF-36 physical function domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Functional Status at Hospital Discharge
SF36 Role Physical Domain
The SF-36 role physical function domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF36 Pain Index Domain
The SF-36 pain index domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF36 General Health Perceptions Domain
The SF-36 general health perceptions domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF36 Vitality Domain
The SF-36 vitality domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF36 Social Functioning Domain
The SF-36 social functioning domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF36 Role-emotional Domain
The SF-36 role-emotion domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF36 Mental Health Index Domain
The SF-36 mental health index domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF36 Standardized Physical Component Scale
The SF36 Standardized Physical Component Scale has been scaled to have a mean of zero and standard deviation of 10 in a general US population. Higher scores indicate better HRQoL.
SF36 Standardized Mental Component Scale
The SF36 Standardized Mental Component Scale has been scaled to have a mean of zero and standard deviation of 10 in a general US population. Higher scores indicate better HRQoL.
SF-36 Role-physical Domain
The SF-36 mental health index domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF-36 Pain Index Domain
The SF-36 mental health index domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF-36 General Health Perceptions Domain
The SF-36 general health perceptions domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF-36 Vitality Domain
The SF-36 vitality domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF-36 Social Functioning Domain
The SF-36 social functioning domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF-36 Role-emotional Domain
The SF-36 role-emotional domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF-36 Mental Health Index Domain
The SF-36 mental health index domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
SF-36 Standardized Physical Component Scale
The SF36 Standardized Physical Component Scale has been scaled to have a mean of zero and standard deviation of 10 in a general US population. Higher scores indicate better HRQoL.
SF-36 Standardized Mental Component Scale
The SF36 Standardized mental Component Scale has been scaled to have a mean of zero and standard deviation of 10 in a general US population. Higher scores indicate better HRQoL.
Full Information
NCT ID
NCT01206166
First Posted
September 14, 2010
Last Updated
February 23, 2021
Sponsor
Clinical Evaluation Research Unit at Kingston General Hospital
Collaborators
Baxter Healthcare Corporation
1. Study Identification
Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT01206166
Brief Title
Trial of Supplemental Parenteral Nutrition in Under and Over Weight Critically Ill Patients (TOP-UP)
Acronym
TOP-UP
Official Title
A Randomized Trial of Supplemental Parenteral Nutrition in Under and Over Weight Critically Ill Patients: The TOP UP Trial (Pilot)
Study Type
Interventional
2. Study Status
Record Verification Date
February 2021
Overall Recruitment Status
Terminated
Why Stopped
Low enrollment rates.
Study Start Date
June 2011 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
March 2015 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
July 2015 (Actual)
3. Sponsor/Collaborators
Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Clinical Evaluation Research Unit at Kingston General Hospital
Collaborators
Baxter Healthcare Corporation
4. Oversight
Data Monitoring Committee
No
5. Study Description
Brief Summary
The specific aim of the proposed study is to conduct a pilot study involving 160 critically-ill lean and obese patients enrolled at 11 sites in Canada, the United States of America, Belgium and France in order to:
Specific Aims
Confirm that we can achieve a clinically significant difference in calorie and protein intake between the two intervention groups.
Estimate recruitment rate i.e. number of eligible and enrolled patients per month per site.
Evaluate the safety, tolerance, and logistics around providing supplemental PN in the study population in the context of a multicenter trial, e.g.
To ensure adequate glycemic control in both groups.
To ensure that the other metabolic consequences of the feeding strategies are minimized.
To establish adequate compliance with study protocols and completion of case report forms
A secondary aim of this pilot study will be:
• To explore the effect of differential effects of calorie and protein delivery on muscle and mass function.
Detailed Description
Background
Critically ill patients are often hypermetabolic and can rapidly become nutritionally compromised. Malnutrition is prevalent in these patients and has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Standard nutrition therapy, i.e. provision of calories, protein and other nutrients consists primarily of enteral nutrition (via a feeding tube into the gastrointestinal tract), parenteral nutrition (via an intravenous tube into the blood), or occasionally a combination of both.
However, the provision of nutrition is sub-optimal and the majority of critically-ill patients do not meet nutritional requirements. Recent studies report that average energy intakes of critically ill patients are only 49% to 70% of calculated requirements. Despite repeated, sustained efforts over the past few years, the investigators have not significantly improved the amount of calories delivered via the enteral route. This leads us to conclude that if the investigators are to be successful at increasing the provision of calories and protein to patients at-risk, the investigators will have to supplement the calories via the parenteral route.
Critically ill patients that are at extremes of weight are at a higher nutritional risk and have higher mortality rates. A recent International multicenter observational study of 2772 ICU patients from 165 ICUs showed a significant inverse linear relationship between the odds of mortality and total daily calories received. Increased amounts of calories was most important for the BMI < 20 group followed by the BMI 20 -< 25 group and BMI > 35 group with no benefit of increased calorie intake for patients in the BMI 25 -< 35 group. Feeding an additional 1000 kcals almost halved the odds of 60-day mortality in patients with a BMI < 25 or > 35. Similar results were observed for feeding an additional 30 grams of protein per day.
Thus, a prospective randomized trial is warranted to confirm our hypothesis that in patients with a BMI of < 25 and those with a BMI > 35 increasing the provision of more energy and protein can impact clinical outcomes. The results of this study will serve to answer some fundamental questions with regards to impact of amount of energy and protein delivered to nutritional at-risk ICU patients and will inform current practice.
Study Intervention:
Patients will be randomized to one of 2 interventions: enteral nutrition alone or enteral nutrition plus parenteral nutrition (supplemental PN group).
6. Conditions and Keywords
Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Critical Illness, Acute Respiratory Failure
Keywords
Randomized trial, Parental nutrition, Enteral nutrition, Intensive care unit, BMI < 25 or ≥ 35
7. Study Design
Primary Purpose
Prevention
Study Phase
Phase 3
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
125 (Actual)
8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions
Arm Title
Enteral Nutrition + Parenteral Nutrition
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Enteral nutrition with the addition of parenteral supplementation (Olimel 5.7%E/N9E).
Arm Title
Enteral Nutrition Only
Arm Type
No Intervention
Arm Description
Enteral nutrition only - no intervention
Intervention Type
Drug
Intervention Name(s)
Olimel (5.7%E / N9E)
Other Intervention Name(s)
Olimel
Intervention Description
OLIMEL(Amino Acids, Dextrose, Lipids, with / without Electrolytes) is indicated for parenteral nutrition for adults when oral or enteral nutrition is impossible, insufficient or contraindicated.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Calorie & Protein Intake 7 Days Post Randomization
Description
Amount of calories & protein received as a percentage of prescribed.
Time Frame
7 days post randomization
Title
Calorie & Protein Intake in First 27 Days
Description
Amount of calories & protein received as a percentage of prescribed.
Time Frame
first 27 days
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
6 Month Mortality
Description
Kaplan-Meier estimate.
Time Frame
6 months
Title
ICU Mortality
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Hospital Mortality
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Duration of ICU Stay
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Duration of Hospital Stay
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Duration of Mechanical Ventilation
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Development of ICU-acquired Infections
Time Frame
ICU discharge
Title
SF36-Physical Functioning Domain
Description
The SF-36 physical function domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
3 months
Title
SF-36 Physical Functioning Domain
Description
The SF-36 physical function domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Functional Status at Hospital Discharge
Time Frame
hospital discharge
Title
SF36 Role Physical Domain
Description
The SF-36 role physical function domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
3 months
Title
SF36 Pain Index Domain
Description
The SF-36 pain index domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
3 months
Title
SF36 General Health Perceptions Domain
Description
The SF-36 general health perceptions domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
3 months
Title
SF36 Vitality Domain
Description
The SF-36 vitality domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
3 months
Title
SF36 Social Functioning Domain
Description
The SF-36 social functioning domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
3 months
Title
SF36 Role-emotional Domain
Description
The SF-36 role-emotion domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
3 months
Title
SF36 Mental Health Index Domain
Description
The SF-36 mental health index domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
3 months
Title
SF36 Standardized Physical Component Scale
Description
The SF36 Standardized Physical Component Scale has been scaled to have a mean of zero and standard deviation of 10 in a general US population. Higher scores indicate better HRQoL.
Time Frame
3 months
Title
SF36 Standardized Mental Component Scale
Description
The SF36 Standardized Mental Component Scale has been scaled to have a mean of zero and standard deviation of 10 in a general US population. Higher scores indicate better HRQoL.
Time Frame
3 months
Title
SF-36 Role-physical Domain
Description
The SF-36 mental health index domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
6 months
Title
SF-36 Pain Index Domain
Description
The SF-36 mental health index domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
6 months
Title
SF-36 General Health Perceptions Domain
Description
The SF-36 general health perceptions domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
6 months
Title
SF-36 Vitality Domain
Description
The SF-36 vitality domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
6 months
Title
SF-36 Social Functioning Domain
Description
The SF-36 social functioning domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
6 months
Title
SF-36 Role-emotional Domain
Description
The SF-36 role-emotional domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
6 months
Title
SF-36 Mental Health Index Domain
Description
The SF-36 mental health index domain ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
6 months
Title
SF-36 Standardized Physical Component Scale
Description
The SF36 Standardized Physical Component Scale has been scaled to have a mean of zero and standard deviation of 10 in a general US population. Higher scores indicate better HRQoL.
Time Frame
6 months
Title
SF-36 Standardized Mental Component Scale
Description
The SF36 Standardized mental Component Scale has been scaled to have a mean of zero and standard deviation of 10 in a general US population. Higher scores indicate better HRQoL.
Time Frame
6 months
10. Eligibility
Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
Critically ill adult patient (≥ 18 years) admitted to ICU
Has acute respiratory failure (ARF) i.e. expected to remain mechanically ventilated for more than 48 hours
Expected ICU dependency of 5 or more days
On or expected to initiate enteral nutrition within 7 days of ICU admission
BMI <25 or ≥ 35 based on pre-ICU actual or estimated dry weight
Exclusion Criteria:
>72 hours from admission to ICU to time of consent
Not expected to survive an additional 48 hrs from screening evaluation
A lack of commitment to full aggressive care (anticipated withholding or withdrawing treatments in the first week but isolated DNR acceptable)
Patients already receiving PN at screening
Absence of All gastrointestinal risk factors, defined as:
High Apache II Score (>20)
On more than 1 vasopressor or increasing doses or vasopressors
Receiving continuous infusion of narcotics
High nasogastric/orogastric output (>500 mL over 24 hours)
Recent surgery involving esophagus, stomach, or small bowel OR peritoneal contamination with bowel contents
Pancreatitis
Multiple gastrointestinal investigations
Recent history of diarrhea/C. Difficile
Surgical patients with future surgeries planned
Ruptured or dissected abdominal aortic aneurysm
Patients admitted with diabetic ketoacidosis or non-ketotic hyperosmolar coma
Pregnant or lactating patients
Patients with clinical fulminant hepatic failure
Patients with Cirrhosis Child's Class C Liver Disease (except those on a transplant list or transplantable)
Dedicated port of central line not available
Known allergy to study nutrients (soy, eggs or olive products)
Enrolment in another industry sponsored ICU intervention study
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Daren K. Heyland, MD
Organizational Affiliation
Clinical Evaluation Research Unit, Kingston General Hospital
Official's Role
Study Chair
Facility Information:
Facility Name
University of Colorado DHSC
City
Boulder
State/Province
Colorado
ZIP/Postal Code
80045
Country
United States
Facility Name
Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis
City
Saint Louis
State/Province
Missouri
ZIP/Postal Code
63110-1093
Country
United States
Facility Name
Mercy Hospital St. Louis
City
Saint Louis
State/Province
Missouri
ZIP/Postal Code
63141
Country
United States
Facility Name
Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine
City
Cleveland
State/Province
Ohio
ZIP/Postal Code
44195
Country
United States
Facility Name
The Ohio State Univsersity Medical Center
City
Columbus
State/Province
Ohio
ZIP/Postal Code
43221
Country
United States
Facility Name
Oregon Health & Science University
City
Portland
State/Province
Oregon
ZIP/Postal Code
97239-3098
Country
United States
Facility Name
University of Texas Health Science Center
City
Houston
State/Province
Texas
ZIP/Postal Code
77030
Country
United States
Facility Name
Erasme University Hospital
City
Brussels
ZIP/Postal Code
B - 1070
Country
Belgium
Facility Name
Royal Alexandra Hospital
City
Edmonton
State/Province
Alberta
ZIP/Postal Code
T5H 3V9
Country
Canada
Facility Name
University of Alberta
City
Edmonton
State/Province
Alberta
ZIP/Postal Code
T5H 3V9
Country
Canada
Facility Name
Grey Nuns Hospital
City
Edmonton
State/Province
Alberta
ZIP/Postal Code
T6L 5X8
Country
Canada
Facility Name
Nouvel Hôpital Civil
City
Strasbourg
ZIP/Postal Code
F - 67091
Country
France
12. IPD Sharing Statement
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
19572118
Citation
Alberda C, Gramlich L, Jones N, Jeejeebhoy K, Day AG, Dhaliwal R, Heyland DK. The relationship between nutritional intake and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients: results of an international multicenter observational study. Intensive Care Med. 2009 Oct;35(10):1728-37. doi: 10.1007/s00134-009-1567-4. Epub 2009 Jul 2. Erratum In: Intensive Care Med. 2009 Oct;35(10):1821.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
15899538
Citation
Villet S, Chiolero RL, Bollmann MD, Revelly JP, Cayeux R N MC, Delarue J, Berger MM. Negative impact of hypocaloric feeding and energy balance on clinical outcome in ICU patients. Clin Nutr. 2005 Aug;24(4):502-9. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2005.03.006.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
12853537
Citation
Krishnan JA, Parce PB, Martinez A, Diette GB, Brower RG. Caloric intake in medical ICU patients: consistency of care with guidelines and relationship to clinical outcomes. Chest. 2003 Jul;124(1):297-305. doi: 10.1378/chest.124.1.297.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
17324665
Citation
Hise ME, Halterman K, Gajewski BJ, Parkhurst M, Moncure M, Brown JC. Feeding practices of severely ill intensive care unit patients: an evaluation of energy sources and clinical outcomes. J Am Diet Assoc. 2007 Mar;107(3):458-65. doi: 10.1016/j.jada.2006.12.012.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
15185069
Citation
Dhaliwal R, Jurewitsch B, Harrietha D, Heyland DK. Combination enteral and parenteral nutrition in critically ill patients: harmful or beneficial? A systematic review of the evidence. Intensive Care Med. 2004 Aug;30(8):1666-71. doi: 10.1007/s00134-004-2345-y. Epub 2004 Jun 8.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
28599676
Citation
Wischmeyer PE, Hasselmann M, Kummerlen C, Kozar R, Kutsogiannis DJ, Karvellas CJ, Besecker B, Evans DK, Preiser JC, Gramlich L, Jeejeebhoy K, Dhaliwal R, Jiang X, Day AG, Heyland DK. A randomized trial of supplemental parenteral nutrition in underweight and overweight critically ill patients: the TOP-UP pilot trial. Crit Care. 2017 Jun 9;21(1):142. doi: 10.1186/s13054-017-1736-8.
Results Reference
derived
Learn more about this trial
Trial of Supplemental Parenteral Nutrition in Under and Over Weight Critically Ill Patients (TOP-UP)
We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs