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.

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.

Electrolyte disorders assessment in solid tumor patients treated with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies: a pooled analysis of 25 randomized clinical trials.

The role of anti-epithelial growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies (anti-EGFR MoAbs) in treatment-related electrolyte disorders is still controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the incidences and overall risks of all-grade and grade 3/4 electrolyte disorder events. We searched relevant clinical trials from PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Knowledge databases, meeting proceedings of American Society of Clinical Oncology and the European Society of Medical Oncology, as well as ClinicalTrials.gov. Eligible studies included phases II, III, and IV RCTs. Statistical analysis was performed to calculate the summary incidence, relative risk (RR), and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) using fixed effects or random effects models based on the heterogeneity of included studies. A total of 16,411 patients from 25 RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. The all-grade incidence of hypomagnesemia related to anti-EGFR MoAbs was 34.0 % (95 % CI 28.0-40.5 %), and that for hypokalemia and hypocalcemia were 14.5 % (95 % CI 8.2-24.4 %) and 16.8 % (95 % CI 14.2-19.7 %), respectively. Compared with chemotherapy alone in colorectal cancer, addition of cetuximab increased the risk of grade 3/4 hypomagnesemia and grade 3/4 hypokalemia with RRs of 7.14 (95 % CI 3.13-16.27, p < 0.001) and 2.19 (95 % CI 1.14-4.23, p = 0.019). Additionally, colorectal cancer patients in panitumumab cases were more vulnerable to grade 3/4 hypomagnesemia and hypokalemia (RR 18.29, 95 % CI 7.29-48.41, p < 0.001, and RR 3.3, 95 % CI 1.32-8.25, p = .011). Treatment with anti-EGFR MoAbs is associated with significantly higher risks of electrolyte disorders such as hypomagnesemia, hypomagnesemia, and hypocalcemia, especially in colorectal cancer. Rigorous monitoring and early treatment of electrolyte disorders are proposed.