The Importance of Nutrition in Cancer Care: A Narrative Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cancer, a complex disease affecting millions globally, presents considerable challenges for both patients and health care providers. Within the broad spectrum of cancer care, nutrition plays a key role in supporting patients throughout their journey. This narrative review examines the role of nutrition in cancer care, exploring its impact on treatment outcomes, nutritional status, current dietary recommendations, physical activity, palliative care, and finally, as a nutritional encouragement for cancer survivors. RECENT FINDINGS: Evidence indicates that cancer and anticancer treatments frequently cause malnutrition and loss of muscle mass, which can exacerbate symptoms, impair immune function, and hamper recovery. Therefore, adequate nutritional support is crucial for maintaining strength, controlling symptoms, and optimizing treatment tolerance in patients with cancer. Several factors influence nutritional needs and dietary recommendations, including cancer type, treatment, and individual patient characteristics. Nutritional care aims not only to ensure sufficient energy and protein intake, but also to manage specific symptoms such as dysgeusia, nausea, and dysphagia. Registered dietitians play a crucial role in providing personalized nutritional guidance, monitoring nutritional status, and implementing interventions to address emerging challenges in cancer care. Furthermore, recent research has underscored the benefits of dietary interventions in cancer treatment. From targeted nutritional supplements to more invasive nutritional support, interest in how nutrition can affect cancer risk and treatment outcomes is increasing. Overall, this review highlights the critical role of nutritional care in comprehensive cancer treatment. By recognizing and meeting dietary demands throughout the entire cancer journey, health care professionals can improve patients' well-being, response to treatment, and long-term prognosis.

Complementarity of nutritional assessment tools to predict prolonged hospital stay and readmission in older patients with solid tumors: A secondary analysis of a cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the complementarity of five nutritional risk screening tools (Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 [NRS-2002], Malnutrition Screening Tool [MST], Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool [MUST], Mini-Nutritional Assessment-Short Form [MNA-SF], and Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment SF [PG-SGA SF]) combined with three malnutrition diagnostic tools (SGA, PG-SGA, and Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition [GLIM]) and their ability to predict poor clinical outcomes in older patients with cancer. METHODS: Using data collected within 48 h of hospital admission, we conducted a prospective cohort study on nutritional risk (NRS-2002, MST, MUST, MNA-SF, and PG-SGA SF) and the presence of malnutrition (SGA, PG-SGA, and GLIM). Patients were grouped according to their nutritional risk and malnutrition status. Accuracy tests and logistic regression analysis were used to evaluate the ability of the combined tools to predict hospital length of stay and readmission. We evaluated 248 older patients (69.7 ± 7.2 y of age, 59.7% men; 27.4% with gastrointestinal tumors). The median length of stay was 4 d (3-9 d), and 65.3% of patients remained hospitalized for ≥ 4 d. RESULTS: The NRS-2002 combined with SGA and MST combined with SGA and GLIM had the highest specificity (> 80%) for predicting hospitalization. Nutritional risk assessed by MNA-SF and malnutrition assessed by PG-SGA were associated with 2.48- and 6.04-fold increased likelihood of hospitalization (≥ 4 d) and readmission (60 d), respectively. CONCLUSION: Concomitant application of MNA-SF (specific for older patients) with PG-SGA (specific for patients with cancer) might enhance the ability to predict length of stay and readmission in hospitalized older patients with solid tumors.

Accuracy of the GLIM Criteria and SGA Compared to PG-SGA for the Diagnosis of Malnutrition and Its Impact on Prolonged Hospitalization: A Prospective Study in Patients with Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Early assessment of malnutrition in cancer patients is essential. This study analyzed the accuracy of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) and the Subjective Global Assessment (SGA), in diagnosing malnutrition, considering the Patient Generated-SGA (PG-SGA) as a reference, and the impact of malnutrition on hospital days. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study in 183 patients with gastrointestinal, head and neck, and lung cancer. Malnutrition was assessed within 48 h, of hospital admission according to the SGA, PG-SGA, and GLIM. Accuracy tests and regression analysis were performed to assess the criterion validity of the GLIM and SGA for diagnosing malnutrition. RESULTS: Malnutrition was diagnosed in 57.3% (SGA), 86.3% (PG-SGA), and 74.9% (GLIM) of the inpatients. The median of hospitalization was 6 (3-11) days, with 47% hospitalized > 6 day. The SGA presented the best accuracy (AUC = 0.832) than the GLIM (AUC = 0.632) compared to PG-SGA. Patients diagnosed with malnutrition by SGA, GLIM, and PG-SGA remained hospitalized for 2.13, 3.19, and 4.56 day more than well-nourished patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: Compared to PG-SGA, the SGA presents good accuracy and adequate specificity (>80%). Malnutrition evaluated by SGA, PG-SGA, and GLIM was associated with more days of hospitalization.