Improving the assessment of malnutrition in cancer: Using systemic inflammation markers as a supplement to the inflammation items of the GLIM criteria.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Systemic inflammation is a key pathogenic criterion for diagnosing malnutrition using the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria. Although cancer is commonly considered as a chronic inflammation-related disease, the inflammatory burden may vary depending on the type and stage of cancer. Therefore, a more precise definition of inflammation criteria could facilitate the identification of malnutrition in cancer. METHODS: This prospective multicenter study included 1683 cancer patients screened via NRS2002 for malnutrition risk. The inflammatory burden index (IBI), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and albumin (ALB) level were used to assess the inflammatory burden. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were used to determine the relationship between the GLIM criteria and overall survival. Harrell's concordance index (C-index) was used to compare the discriminative performance of the original, IBI-based, CRP-based, NLR-based, and ALB-based GLIM criteria for survival. Logistic regression models were used to assess the association between GLIM criteria and short-term outcomes, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization costs. RESULTS: Compared to the original GLIM criteria, the IBI/CRP/NLR/ALB-based GLIM criteria better predicted the long-term outcomes of patients with cancer (chi-square: 1.316 vs. 78.321 vs. 74.740 vs. 88.719 vs. 100.921). The C-index revealed that the inflammation marker-based GLIM criteria showed significantly better prognostic accuracy than the original GLIM criteria. The ALB-based GLIM criteria exhibited the best prognostic accuracy. The inflammation marker-based GLIM criteria were independent predictive factors for the long-term prognosis of cancer. Patients with malnutrition had a 45% higher risk of adverse long-term prognoses than those without malnutrition. The inflammation marker-based GLIM criteria had good prognostic ability to predict outcomes at 3, 6, and 12 months. The stepwise effect of the grading of severity via the IBI-based GLIM criteria and CRP-based GLIM criteria was notable. The inflammation marker-based GLIM criteria are useful for predicting short-term outcomes, length of hospitalization, and hospitalization costs. CONCLUSION: The inflammation marker-based GLIM criteria have a stronger predictive value than the original GLIM criteria in evaluating both the short- and long-term prognoses of cancer patients. It is recommended to use the inflammation marker-based GLIM criteria for nutritional evaluation of cancer patients.

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.

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.

Determinants and nutritional assessment value of hand grip strength in patients hospitalized with cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Hand grip strength (HGS) has emerged as a predictor of the nutritional status. However, many factors may modify the malnutrition-HGS association. This study explored the nutritional assessment value and determinants of HGS in patients hospitalized with cancer. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: In this multicenter, retrospective, observational study (11,314 patients), the Receiver operator characteristic curve was used to observe HGS and nutritional status sensitivity/specificity. Sex; age; height; weight; mid-upper arm circumference (MAMC); Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) score; Karnofsky score; physical function (PF) domain; cognitive function (CF) domain; global health and quality of life (QL) domain of EORTC QLQ-C30 (a quality of life instrument designed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer); and albumin, prealbumin, and hemoglobin levels were included in a Stepwise analysis model to identify the factors influencing HGS. RESULTS: HGS showed a very low diagnostic value and accuracy for identifying severe malnourishment (area under the curve, 0.615-0.640; p<0.01). HGS positively correlated with sex; height; weight; MAMC; Karnofsky score; QL, PF, and CF domains; and hemoglobin and prealbumin levels (Beta= 0.02-0.42, p<=0.05), and negatively with age (Beta=-0.19, p<0.01). However, the PG-SGA score was excluded because of its very limited contribution to HGS variability. CONCLUSIONS: HGS is a mutifactorial index. The use of HGS cutoff values to identify malnutrition is markedly challenging. Thus, HGS may be of limited use as a predictor of nutritional status.