Value of the modified Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment in indicating the need for nutrition intervention and predicting overall survival in patients with malignant tumors in at least two organs.

BACKGROUND: Although the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) is a reference standard used to assess a patient's nutrition status, it is cumbersome to administer. The aim of the present study was to estimate the value of a simpler and easier-to-use modified PG-SGA (mPG-SGA) to evaluate the nutrition status and need for intervention in patients with malignant tumors present in at least two organs. METHODS: A total of 591 patients (343 male and 248 female) were included from the INSCOC study. A Pearson correlation analysis was conducted to assess the correlation between the mPG-SGA and nutrition-related factors, with the optimal cut-off defined by a receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). The consistency between the mPG-SGA and PG-SGA was compared in a concordance analysis. A survival analysis was used to determine the effects of nutritional intervention among different nutrition status groups. Univariable and multivariable Cox analyses were applied to evaluate the association of the mPG-SGA with the all-cause mortality. RESULTS: The mPG-SGA showed a negative association with nutrition-related factors. Individuals with an mPG-SGA ≥ 5 (rounded from 4.5) were considered to need nutritional intervention. Among the malnourished patients (mPG-SGA ≥ 5), the overall survival (OS) of those who received nutrition intervention was significantly higher than that of patients who did not. However, the OS was not significantly different in the better-nourished patients (mPG-SGA < 5). CONCLUSION: Our findings support that the mPG-SGA is a feasible tool that can be used to guide nutritional interventions and predict the survival of patients with malignant tumors affecting at least two organs.

De novo Creation and Assessment of a Prognostic Fat-Age-Inflammation Index "FAIN" in Patients With Cancer: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

Background and Aims: Malnutrition is highly prevalent and is related to multiple impaired clinical outcomes in cancer patients. This study aimed to de novo create an objective, nutrition-related index specially for prognostic purposes in oncology populations. Methods: We performed a multicenter cohort study including 14,134 cancer patients. The prognostic impact for each baseline characteristic was estimated by calculating Harrell's C-index. The optimal parameters reflecting the nutritional and inflammatory impact on patients' overall survival were selected to develop the fat-age-inflammation (FAIN) index. The associations of the FAIN with the nutritional status, physical performance, quality of life, short-term outcomes and mortality of patients were comprehensively evaluated. Independent external validation was performed to further assess the prognostic value of the FAIN. Results: The study enrolled 7,468 men and 6,666 women with a median age of 57 years and a median follow-up of 42 months. The FAIN index was defined as: (triceps skinfold thickness + albumin) / [age + 5 × (neutrophil count/lymphocyte count)]. There were significant associations of the FAIN with the nutritional status, physical performance, quality of life and short-term outcomes. The FAIN also showed better discrimination performance than the Nutritional Risk Index, the Prognostic Nutritional Index and the Controlling Nutritional Status index (all P < 0.05). In multivariable-adjusted models, the FAIN was independently associated with a reduced death hazard both as a continuous variable (HR = 0.57, 95%CI = 0.47-0.68) and per one standard deviation (HR = 0.83, 95%CI = 0.78-0.88). External validation in a multicenter lung cancer cohort (n = 227) further confirmed the prognostic value of the FAIN. Conclusions: This study created and assessed the prognostic FAIN index, which might act as a feasible option to monitor the nutritional status and help develop intervention strategies to optimize the survival outcomes of cancer patients.

Development and validation of a Modified Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment as a nutritional assessment tool in cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Completing Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) questionnaires is time consuming. This study aimed to develop and validate an easy-to-use modified PG-SGA (mPG-SGA) for cancer patients. METHODS: Seventy professionals assessed the content validity, comprehensibility, and difficulty of the full PG-SGA. A survey including the PG-SGA and other questionnaires was completed by 34 071 adult hospitalized cancer patients with first cancer diagnosis or recurrent disease with any tumour comorbidities from the INSCOC study. Among them, 1558 patients were followed for 5 years after admission. Reliability and rank correlation were estimated to assess the consistency between PG-SGA items and to select mPG-SGA items. The external and internal validity, test-retest reliability, and predictive validity were tested for the mPG-SGA via comparison with both the PG-SGA and abridged PG-SGA (abPG-SGA). RESULTS: After deleting items that more than 50% of professionals considered difficult to evaluate (Worksheet 4) and items with an item-total correlation <0.1, the mPG-SGA was constructed. Nutritional status was categorized using mPG-SGA scores as well-nourished (0 points) or mildly (1-2 points), moderately (3-6 points), or severely malnourished (≥7 points) based on the area under curve (0.962, 0.989, and 0.985) and maximal sensitivity (0.924, 0.918, and 0.945) and specificity (1.000, 1.000, and 0.938) of the cut-off scores. The external and internal validity and test-retest reliability were good. Significant median overall survival differences were found among nutritional status groups categorized by the mPG-SGA: 24, 18, 14, and 10 months for well-nourished, mildly malnourished, moderately malnourished, and severely malnourished, respectively (all Ps < 0.05). Neither the PG-SGA nor the abridged PG-SGA could discriminate the median overall survival differences between the well-nourished and mildly malnourished groups. CONCLUSIONS: We systematically developed and validated the mPG-SGA as an easier-to-use nutritional assessment tool for cancer patients. The mPG-SGA appears to have better predictive validity for survival than the PG-SGA and abridged PG-SGA.

Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition criteria as a nutrition assessment tool for patients with cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Since the launch of Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM), there has been an urgent need to validate the new criteria, especially in patients with cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate and validate the use of the GLIM criteria in patients with cancer. METHOD: This multicenter cohort study compared the GLIM with the scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (sPG-SGA). The 1-y survival rate, multivariate Cox regression analysis, κ-value, sensitivity, specificity, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and time-dependent ROC analysis were applied to identify the performance of the GLIM. RESULTS: Among the 3777 patients in the study, 50.9% versus 49.1% or 36.3% versus 63.7% of the patients were defined as well-nourished and malnourished by GLIM or sPG-SGA, respectively. GLIM presented moderate consistency (κ = 0.54, P < 0.001), fair sensitivity and specificity (70.5 and 88.3%) compared with sPG-SGA. There was no difference in the 1-y survival rate in malnourished patients (76.9 versus 76.4%, P = 0.711), but it was significantly different in well-nourished patients (85.8 versus 90.3%, P < 0.001) between GLIM and sPG-SGA. The above difference was eliminated after omitted nutritional risk screening (NRS)-2002 screening before GLIM (88.1 versus 90.3%, P = 0.078). Omitting NRS-2002 screening before GLIM did not change the 1-y survival rate in well-nourished or malnourished patients by GLIM with NRS-2002 screening (76.9 versus 78.9%, P = 0.099; 85.8% versus 88.1%, P = 0.092) although it significantly raised the rate of malnutrition to 72.5%. The combination of "weight loss and cancer" showed better performance than other combinations. CONCLUSIONS: GLIM could be a convenient alternative to sPG-SGA in nutrition assessment for patients with cancer. The combination of "weight loss and cancer" was better than other combinations. Considering the higher risk for malnutrition in patients with cancer, NRS-2002 screening may not be needed before GLIM.

The GLIM criteria as an effective tool for nutrition assessment and survival prediction in older adult cancer patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Elderly cancer patients are at particularly high risk for malnutrition because both the disease and the old age threaten their nutritional status. The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) released new universal criteria for diagnosing and grading malnutrition, but the validation of these criteria in elderly cancer population is not well documented. Our objective was to investigate the application of the GLIM criteria in nutrition assessment and survival prediction in elderly cancer patients. METHODS: This retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on a primary cohort of 1192 cancer patients aged 65 years or older enrolled from a multi-institutional registry, and a validation cohort of 300 elderly cancer patients treated at the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University. Patients considered at-risk for malnutrition based on the NRS-2002 were assessed using the GLIM criteria. The association between the nutritional status and patients' overall survival (OS) was then analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method and a Cox model. A nomogram was also established that included additional independent clinical prognostic variables. To determine the predictive accuracy and discriminatory capacity of the nomogram, the C-index, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and calibration curve were evaluated. RESULTS: The percentage of patients considered "at-risk" for malnutrition was 64.8% and 67.3% for the primary and validation cohorts, respectively. GLIM-defined malnutrition was diagnosed in 48.4% of patients in the primary cohort and 46.0% in the validation cohort. In the primary cohort, patients at risk of malnutrition (NRS-2002 ≥ 3) showed a worse OS than those with a NRS-2002 < 3 (HR 1.34, 1.10-1.64; p = 0.003). Additionally, patients with GLIM-defined severe malnutrition (HR1.71, 1.37-2.14; p < 0.001) or moderate malnutrition (HR1.35, 1.09-1.66; p = 0.006) showed a significantly shorter OS compared to those without malnutrition. The nomogram incorporating the domains of the GLIM with other variables was accurate, especially for predicting the 1- and 2-year overall survival rates. CONCLUSIONS: The GLIM criteria can be used in elderly cancer patients not only to assess malnutrition, but also to predict survival outcome. The nomogram developed based on the GLIM domains can provide a more accurate prediction of the prognosis than existing systems.

Nutritional assessment and risk factors associated to malnutrition in patients with esophageal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Esophageal cancer is the fourth most common cause of cancer death in China. Patients with esophageal cancer are more likely to suffer from malnutrition. The purpose of this study is to assess nutritional status of patients with esophageal cancer from multiple perspectives and analyze the risk factors. METHODS: A total of 1482 esophageal cancer patients were enrolled in the study. We investigated the Scored Patient Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) scores, NRS-2002 scores, Karnofsky performance status scores, anthropometric, and laboratory indicators of patients. Unconditional logistic regression analysis was applied to identify the risk factors of nutritional status. RESULTS: PG-SGA (≥4) and NRS-2002 (≥3) showed the incidence of malnutrition were 76% and 50%, respectively. In the patients with PG-SGA score ≥4, the proportion of patients who did not receive any nutritional support was 60%. The incidence of malnutrition in females was significantly higher than that in males. Besides, abnormality rates of Red blood cell (P < 0.001), MAC (P = 0.037), and MAMC (P < 0.001) in males was significantly higher than that in females, while abnormality rates of TSF (P < 0.001) was lower than that in females. After adjusted with the other potential risk factors listed, unconditional logistic regression analysis indicated smoking (odds ratio: 2.868, 95% confidence interval: 1.660-4.954), drinking (OR: 1.726, 95% CI: 1.099-2.712), family history (OR: 1.840, 95% CI: 1.132-2.992), radiotherapy or chemotherapy (OR: 1.594, 95% CI: 1.065-2.387), and pathological stage (OR: 2.263, 95% CI: 1.084-4.726) might be the risk factors of nutritional status, while nutritional support can reduce the risk of malnutrition. CONCLUSION: Effective nutritional risk assessment methods and nutritional intervention measures can be adopted according to the research data to improve quality of life of esophageal cancer patients.

Nutritional Risk Assessment by Scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment Associated with Demographic Characteristics in 23,904 Common Malignant Tumors Patients.

Malnutrition is a problem affecting tumor patients greatly. This study aims to investigate whether demographic characteristics are related to the malnutrition of cancer patients. Twenty-three thousand nine hundred and four (23,904) patients with 16 common malignant tumors were enrolled in the study. Patient Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) was used as a screening tool to assess the nutritional risk of patients and analysis of variance was used to compare PG-SGA scores of patients. Correlations between PG-SGA scores and demographic characteristics were evaluated by correlation analysis. We observed that 57.88% tumor patients had some degree of malnutrition (score ≥4) and only 20.61% were well-nourished (score 0-1). Screening scores were higher among older patients for most of the tumors. PG-SGA scores showed the significant difference between females and males in some tumors. In addition, the PG-SGA scores of some tumors were significantly different in various types of medical insurances, education levels, occupations, regions, and nationalities. Correlation analysis indicated the existence of associations between PG-SGA scores and demographic characteristics. Understanding the distribution of nutritional risk of tumor patients and the correlations between the PG-SGA scores and demographic characteristics could help identify subgroups who may benefit from targeted interventions to improve the effect of clinical treatment and the quality of life for oncology patients.