RESUMO
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.
RESUMO
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.
RESUMO
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.
