Machine learning models to predict outcomes at 30-days using Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition combinations with and without muscle mass in people with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Equipment to assess muscle mass is not available in all health services. Yet we have limited understanding of whether applying the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria without an assessment of muscle mass affects the ability to predict adverse outcomes. This study used machine learning to determine which combinations of GLIM phenotypic and etiologic criteria are most important for the prediction of 30-day mortality and unplanned admission using combinations including and excluding low muscle mass. METHODS: In a cohort of 2801 participants from two cancer malnutrition point prevalence studies, we applied the GLIM criteria with and without muscle mass. Phenotypic criteria were assessed using ≥5% unintentional weight loss, body mass index, subjective assessment of muscle stores from the PG-SGA. Aetiologic criteria included self-reported reduced food intake and inflammation (metastatic disease). Machine learning approaches were applied to predict 30-day mortality and unplanned admission using models with and without muscle mass. RESULTS: Participants with missing data were excluded, leaving 2494 for analysis [49.6% male, mean (SD) age: 62.3 (14.2) years]. Malnutrition prevalence was 19.5% and 17.5% when muscle mass was included and excluded, respectively. However, 48 (10%) of malnourished participants were missed if muscle mass was excluded. For the nine GLIM combinations that excluded low muscle mass the most important combinations to predict mortality were (1) weight loss and inflammation and (2) weight loss and reduced food intake. Machine learning metrics were similar in models excluding or including muscle mass to predict mortality (average accuracy: 84% vs. 88%; average sensitivity: 41% vs. 38%; average specificity: 85% vs. 89%). Weight loss and reduced food intake was the most important combination to predict unplanned hospital admission. Machine learning metrics were almost identical in models excluding or including muscle mass to predict unplanned hospital admission, with small differences observed only if reported to one decimal place (average accuracy: 77% vs. 77%; average sensitivity: 29% vs. 29%; average specificity: 84% vs. 84%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate predictive ability is maintained, although the ability to identify all malnourished patients is compromised, when muscle mass is excluded from the GLIM diagnosis. This has important implications for assessment in health services where equipment to assess muscle mass is not available. Our findings support the robustness of the GLIM approach and an ability to apply some flexibility in excluding certain phenotypic or aetiologic components if necessary, although some cases will be missed.

Health service nutrition practices and associations with clinical outcomes in patients undergoing resection for upper gastrointestinal cancer: Results from the multi-centre NOURISH point prevalence study.

BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to investigate health service nutrition practices of sites providing care to patients undergoing surgery for upper gastrointestinal cancer within Australia, including the provision of perioperative nutrition support services and outpatient clinics, as well as the use of evidence-based nutrition care pathways/protocols. Secondary aims were to investigate associations between the use of a nutrition care pathway/protocol and patient outcomes. METHODS: Principal investigator dietitians for the sites (n = 27) participating in the NOURISH point prevalence study participated in a purpose-built site-specific survey regarding perioperative nutrition practices and protocols. Data from the 200 patients who participated in the study (including malnutrition prevalence, preoperative weight loss and receipt of dietetics intervention, intraoperative feeding tube insertions, provision of nutrition support day 1 post surgery, length of stay, and complications) were investigated using multivariate analysis to determine associations with the sites' use of a nutrition care pathway/protocol. RESULTS: The majority of sites (>92%) reported having dietetics services available in chemotherapy/radiotherapy. Eighty-five percent of sites reported having some form of outpatient clinic service; however, a routine service was only available at 26% of sites preoperatively and 37% postoperatively. Most preoperative services were embedded into surgical/oncology clinics (70%); however, this was reported for only 44% of postoperative clinics. Only 44% had a nutrition care pathway/protocol in place. The use of a nutrition care pathway/protocol was associated with lower rates of malnutrition, as well as higher rates of preoperative dietetics intervention, intraoperative feeding tube insertions, and European Society of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) guideline compliant care day 1 post surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study demonstrate varied perioperative outpatient nutrition services in this high-risk patient group. The use of nutrition care pathways and protocols was associated with improved patient outcomes.

Implementation of a standardised perioperative nutrition care pathway in upper gastrointestinal cancer surgery: A multisite pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative nutrition support is recommended for patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer surgery; however, limited evidence exists regarding implementation of a nutrition care pathway in clinical practice. The aims of this pilot study were to determine whether implementation of a standardised perioperative nutrition pathway for patients undergoing UGI cancer surgery improves access to dietetics care, as well as to evaluate study feasibility, fidelity, resource requirements and effect on clinical outcomes. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed UGI cancer from four major metropolitan hospitals in Melbourne, planned for curative intent surgery, were included in the prospective pilot study (n = 35), with historical controls (n = 35) as standard care. Outcomes were dietetics care (dietetics contacts) nutritional status, hand grip strength, weight change, preoperative hospital admissions, complications and length of stay, recruitment feasibility, fidelity and adherence, and resource requirements. Continuous data were analysed using independent samples t test accounting for unequal variances or a Mann-Whitney U test. Dichotomous data were analysed using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: The percentage of participants receiving preoperative dietetic intervention increased from 55% to 100% (p < 0.001). Mean ± SD dietetics contacts increased from 2.2 ± 3.7 to 5.9 ± 3.9 (p < 0.001). Non-statistically significant decreases in preoperative nutrition-related hospital admissions, and surgical complications were demonstrated in patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy. Recruitment rate was 81%, and adherence to the nutrition pathway was high (> 70% for all stages of the pathway). The mean ± SD estimated resource requirement for the preoperative period was 3.7 ± 2.8 h per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of this standardised nutrition pathway resulted in improved access to dietetics care. Recruitment feasibility and high fidelity to the intervention suggest that a larger study would be viable.

Comparison of the prevalence of 21 GLIM phenotypic and etiologic criteria combinations and association with 30-day outcomes in people with cancer: A retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria require validation in various clinical populations. This study determined the prevalence of malnutrition in people with cancer using all possible diagnostic combinations of GLIM etiologic and phenotypic criteria and determined the combinations that best predicted mortality and unplanned hospital admission within 30 days. METHODS: The GLIM criteria were applied, in a cohort of participants from two cancer malnutrition point prevalence studies (N = 2801), using 21 combinations of the phenotypic (≥5% unintentional weight loss, body mass index [BMI], subjective assessment of muscle stores [from PG-SGA]) and etiologic (reduced food intake, inflammation [using metastatic disease as a proxy]) criteria. Machine learning approaches were applied to predict 30-day mortality and unplanned admission. RESULTS: We analysed 2492 participants after excluding those with missing data. Overall, 19% (n = 485) of participants were malnourished. The most common GLIM combinations were weight loss and reduced food intake (15%, n = 376), and low muscle mass and reduced food intake (12%, n = 298). Machine learning models demonstrated malnutrition diagnosis by weight loss and reduced muscle mass plus either reduced food intake or inflammation were the most important combinations to predict mortality at 30-days (accuracy 88%). Malnutrition diagnosis by weight loss or reduced muscle mass plus reduced food intake was most important for predicting unplanned admission within 30-days (accuracy 77%). CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning demonstrated that the phenotypic criteria of weight loss and reduced muscle mass combined with either etiologic criteria were important for predicting mortality. In contrast, the etiologic criteria of reduced food intake in combination with weight loss or reduced muscle mass was important for predicting unplanned admission. Understanding the phenotypic and etiologic criteria contributing to the GLIM diagnosis is important in clinical practice to identify people with cancer at higher risk of adverse outcomes.

Does implementation of and adherence to enhanced recovery after surgery improve perioperative nutritional management in colorectal cancer surgery?

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is independently associated with poor outcomes in colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery including increased complications and length of stay (LOS). The purpose of this study was to identify changes to perioperative nutritional management and surgical outcomes post implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol. METHODS: Data on LOS and adherence to the ERAS protocol, including preoperative fasting time, nutritional assessment and supplementation was prospectively collected for the pre-ERAS group who underwent surgery for CRC between February and August 2019. The post-ERAS group involved a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of patients who underwent surgery between October 2019 and July 2020. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty patients were included, (Pre-ERAS n = 42, Post-ERAS n = 88). A reduction in time to first solid intake by 1 day (P = 0.010), time to first bowel action (P = 0.007) and incidence of nausea (P < 0.001) was seen in the post-ERAS group. Provision of postoperative oral supplements increased from 33.3% to 70.5% (P < 0.001) in the post-ERAS group. Thirteen post-ERAS patients had a ≥ 70% adherence to the ERAS protocol and this subgroup had an associated reduction in LOS, 6.5 (4) days to 5 (3), P = 0.020. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the ERAS protocol improved perioperative patient care and outcomes. Early feeding was associated with reduced gastrointestinal symptoms without an increase in complications. Adherence to ERAS was associated with a reduction in LOS. Further research is required to evaluate the role of preoperative nutritional screening and intervention within an ERAS protocol.

The health-related quality of life changes following surgery in patients with colorectal cancer: a longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is commonly treated with surgery and its success is frequently defined by cure rates. Impact on other aspects of health and wellbeing are less frequently considered in clinical practice. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide a useful means of assessing such impacts. This study examines changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after surgical resection using PROMs. METHODS: A prospective, longitudinal study was undertaken in 49 adults receiving curative surgery for CRC. Participants completed the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT-C) before surgery, and at 2 to 4 weeks, 3 and 6 months post-surgery. Linear mixed models were used to analyse FACT-C wellbeing and subscale scores. RESULTS: Patients reported a clinically important deterioration in functional and physical wellbeing 2 to 4 weeks post-surgery (both P < 0.05); differences at 6 months after surgery were trivial. Conversely, patients reported clinically important improvement in emotional wellbeing at 2 to 4 weeks post-surgery; this improvement was sustained at 3 and 6 months post-surgery (all P < 0.05). For social wellbeing and colorectal cancer-specific concerns, changes from before surgery at follow-up assessments were not statistically significant (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: While physical aspects of HRQoL are affected in the short term by CRC surgery, clinically significant improvement in emotional wellbeing are reported early (2 to 4 weeks post-surgery). Future research may help identify patients who are at greater risk of surgical impacts on health and wellbeing.

Implementing a standardised perioperative nutrition care pathway in upper gastrointestinal cancer surgery: a mixed-methods analysis of implementation using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

BACKGROUND: Implementation studies of complex interventions such as nutrition care pathways are important to health services research, as they support translation of research into practice. There is limited research regarding implementation of a nutrition care pathway in an upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer population. The aim of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the implementation process of a perioperative nutrition care pathway in UGI cancer surgery using The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). METHODS: This was a mixed methods implementation study conducted during a pilot study of a standardised nutrition care pathway across four major hospitals between September 2018 to August 2019. Outcome measures included five focus groups among study dietitians (n = 4-8 per group), and quantitative satisfaction surveys from multi-disciplinary team (MDT) members (n = 14) and patients (n = 18). Focus group responses were analysed thematically using the CFIR constructs, which were used as a priori codes. Survey responses were summarised using means and standard deviations. A convergent parallel mixed methods approach according to CFIR domains and constructs was used to integrate qualitative and quantitative data. RESULTS: Qualitative data demonstrated that dietitian perceptions primarily aligned with five CFIR constructs (networks and communications, structural characteristics, adaptability, compatibility and patient needs/resources), indicating a complex clinical and implementation environment. Challenges to implementation mostly related to adapting the pathway, and the compatibility of nutrition coordination to existing aspects of care within each setting. Identified benefits from dietitian qualitative data and MDT survey responses included increased engagement between the dietitian and MDT, and a more proactive approach to nutrition care. Patients were highly satisfied with the service, with the majority of survey items being rated highly (≥4 of a possible 5 points). CONCLUSIONS: The nutrition care pathway was perceived to be beneficial by key stakeholders. Based on the findings, sustainability and compliance to this model of care may be achieved with improved systems level coordination and communication.

Ability of malnutrition screening and assessment tools to identify computed tomography defined low muscle mass in colorectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition and low muscle mass are independently associated with poor outcomes in colorectal cancer (CRC). However, tools to identify low muscle mass are limited in the clinical setting. We investigated the ability of existing malnutrition screening and assessment tools to identify low muscle mass assessed by computed tomography (CT). Secondary aims were to determine the feasibility of CT analysis and handgrip strength (HGS). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An exploratory study of patients who underwent curative surgery for CRC between February and September 2019. Nutrition tools used included body mass index (BMI), Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST), and Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA). Muscle mass was determined by preoperative CT image at the third lumbar vertebral level (L3), and muscle strength was determined by HGS dynamometry. Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare results of nutrition tools with CT muscle assessment. RESULTS: In total, 57 patients were included. MST classified 18 patients (32%) as at risk of malnutrition, and PG-SGA classified 10 patients (17%) as malnourished. Fifty-one (90%) CT scans were analysable and 21 (47%) had low muscle mass. Of those with low muscle mass, PG-SGA classified 22 patients (92%) as well nourished and MST classified 17 patients (71%) as not being at nutrition risk. No tool was able to identify CT-diagnosed low muscle mass. Inability to complete HGS was associated with malnutrition (P = .001). CONCLUSION: In this cohort, nutrition screening and assessment tools did not identify CT-diagnosed low muscle mass. Feasible tools to identify low muscle mass in the clinical setting are required.

Adherence to ESPEN guidelines and associations with postoperative outcomes in upper gastrointestinal cancer resection: results from the multi-centre NOURISH point prevalence study.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nutrition support is an essential component of management in upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer resection, however there is limited knowledge of current clinical practice. This study aimed to describe the postoperative nutrition support received by patients undergoing UGI cancer resections, assess adherence with ESPEN surgical guideline recommendations, and to investigate differences between oesophageal, gastric and pancreatic surgeries. The secondary aim was to explore the association of adherence with ESPEN guidelines and provision of nutrition support, with surgical complications and length of stay (LOS). METHODS: The NOURISH point prevalence study was conducted between September 2019-June 2020 across 27 Australian tertiary centres. Malnutrition was diagnosed using subjective global assessment. Data on postoperative diet codes, prescription of nutrition support (oral (ONS), enteral (EN), parenteral (PN)) and nutritional adequacy were collected by dietitians for the first 10 days of admission. Fisher's exact test was used to determine differences in nutritional management and adherence to ESPEN guidelines between surgery types. Multivariate regression analysed associations with surgical outcomes. RESULTS: Two-hundred participants were included (42% pancreatic, 33% oesophageal, 25% gastric surgery). Overall, only 34.9% (n = 53) met the guideline recommendations that were applicable to them. Early oral intake of fluids or solids (within 24 h post surgery) was initiated for 23.5% (n = 47), whilst ONS/EN/PN was initiated for 49.5% (n = 99). Only 25% of pancreatic surgeries had nutrition support initiated on the first postoperative day compared to 86.4% of oesophageal and 42.0% of gastric surgeries (p < 0.001). In those who were 'nil by mouth', EN/PN were commenced within 24 h for 51.0% (n = 78), with 18.5% and 45.2% for pancreatic and gastric surgeries compared to 86.0% in oesophageal surgeries (p < 0.001). In malnourished patients, 35.7% (n = 30) commenced EN within 24 h, with 11.1% and 31.8% for pancreatic and gastric compared to 73.1% in oesophageal surgeries (p < 0.001). For patients meeting <60% energy/protein requirements for ≥7 days, only 14.8% (n = 9) received EN/PN, with 2.5% and 16.7% of pancreatic and gastric compared to 75.0% of oesophageal surgeries (p < 0.001). The number of days spent 'nil by mouth' or 'clear fluids' without EN/PN, as well as number of days with <60% estimated requirements met were independently associated with increased LOS and complications. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there was poor adherence to the majority of assessed ESPEN guidelines, and care for patients undergoing pancreatic and gastric surgeries was less compliant than oesophagectomy. Poor nutritional adequacy was associated with increased LOS and complications. There is a clear need for knowledge translation and implementation studies to increase adherence to evidence-based recommendations in the Australian setting supported by an understanding of barriers and enablers to optimal postoperative nutrition management.

Awareness and perceptions of nutrition support in upper gastrointestinal cancer surgery: A national survey of multidisciplinary clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing surgery for upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer are at high risk of malnutrition, and a multidisciplinary approach to management is recommended. This study aimed to determine practices, awareness and perceptions of multi-disciplinary clinicians with regards to malnutrition screening and provision of nutrition support. METHODS: A national survey of dietitians, surgeons, oncologists and nurses was conducted using a 30-item online REDCap survey, including questions regarding self-reported malnutrition screening/nutrition support practices, awareness and perceptions, and barriers and enablers. The survey was distributed via professional organisations/networks between 1st September and 30th November 2020. Results are presented as counts and percentages. RESULTS: There were 130 participants (56% dietitians, 25% surgeons, 11% nurses, 8% oncologists). The majority reported that dietitians and nurses performed malnutrition screening, and dietitians and surgeons prescribed nutrition support. Most participants reported that their health service had dietetics support available overall (98%), however only 41% reported having an outpatient service. Participants (>90%) demonstrated very high awareness of the significance of malnutrition and the importance of early nutrition support. Participants mostly perceived dietitians, nurses and surgeons to be responsible for malnutrition screening, whilst responsibility of prescription of nutrition support was mostly dietitians and surgeons. There were a higher number of barriers for the outpatient setting (48%) than the inpatient setting (38%). CONCLUSIONS: Participants identified a high awareness of the importance of identification and treatment of malnutrition in UGI cancer surgery. However reported practices varied and appear to be lacking in the outpatient setting, with significant barriers identified to providing optimal nutrition care.

Assessment of Nutritional Status and Nutrition Impact Symptoms in Patients Undergoing Resection for Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer: Results from the Multi-Centre NOURISH Point Prevalence Study.

BACKGROUND: Identification and treatment of malnutrition are essential in upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer. However, there is limited understanding of the nutritional status of UGI cancer patients at the time of curative surgery. This prospective point prevalence study involving 27 Australian tertiary hospitals investigated nutritional status at the time of curative UGI cancer resection, as well as presence of preoperative nutrition impact symptoms, and associations with length of stay (LOS) and surgical complications. METHODS: Subjective global assessment, hand grip strength (HGS) and weight were performed within 7 days of admission. Data on preoperative weight changes, nutrition impact symptoms, and dietary intake were collected using a purpose-built data collection tool. Surgical LOS and complications were also recorded. Multivariate regression models were developed for nutritional status, unintentional weight loss, LOS and complications. RESULTS: This study included 200 patients undergoing oesophageal, gastric and pancreatic surgery. Malnutrition prevalence was 42% (95% confidence interval (CI) 35%, 49%), 49% lost ≥5% weight in 6 months, and 47% of those who completed HGS assessment had low muscle strength with no differences between surgical procedures (p = 0.864, p = 0.943, p = 0.075, respectively). The overall prevalence of reporting at least one preoperative nutrition impact symptom was 55%, with poor appetite (37%) and early satiety (23%) the most frequently reported. Age (odds ratio (OR) 4.1, 95% CI 1.5, 11.5, p = 0.008), unintentional weight loss of ≥5% in 6 months (OR 28.7, 95% CI 10.5, 78.6, p < 0.001), vomiting (OR 17.1, 95% CI 1.4, 207.8, 0.025), reduced food intake lasting 2-4 weeks (OR 7.4, 95% CI 1.3, 43.5, p = 0.026) and ≥1 month (OR 7.7, 95% CI 2.7, 22.0, p < 0.001) were independently associated with preoperative malnutrition. Factors independently associated with unintentional weight loss were poor appetite (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6, 8.4, p = 0.002) and degree of solid food reduction of <75% (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2, 9.2, p = 0.02) and <50% (OR 4.9, 95% CI 1.5, 15.6, p = 0.008) of usual intake. Malnutrition (regression coefficient 3.6, 95% CI 0.1, 7.2, p = 0.048) and unintentional weight loss (regression coefficient 4.1, 95% CI 0.5, 7.6, p = 0.026) were independently associated with LOS, but no associations were found for complications. CONCLUSIONS: Despite increasing recognition of the importance of preoperative nutritional intervention, a high proportion of patients present with malnutrition or clinically significant weight loss, which are associated with increased LOS. Factors associated with malnutrition and weight loss should be incorporated into routine preoperative screening. Further investigation is required of current practice for dietetics interventions received prior to UGI surgery and if this mitigates the impact on clinical outcomes.

Preoperative Nutrition Intervention in Patients Undergoing Resection for Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer: Results from the Multi-Centre NOURISH Point Prevalence Study.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative nutrition intervention is recommended prior to upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer resection; however, there is limited understanding of interventions received in current clinical practice. This study investigated type and frequency of preoperative dietetics intervention and nutrition support received and clinical and demographic factors associated with receipt of intervention. Associations between intervention and preoperative weight loss, surgical length of stay (LOS), and complications were also investigated. METHODS: The NOURISH Point Prevalence Study was conducted between September 2019 and May 2020 across 27 Australian tertiary centres. Subjective global assessment and weight were performed within 7 days of admission. Patients reported on preoperative dietetics and nutrition intervention, and surgical LOS and complications were recorded. RESULTS: Two-hundred patients participated (59% male, mean (standard deviation) age 67 (10)). Sixty percent had seen a dietitian preoperatively, whilst 50% were receiving nutrition support (92% oral nutrition support (ONS)). Patients undergoing pancreatic surgery were less likely to receive dietetics intervention and nutrition support than oesophageal or gastric surgeries (p < 0.001 and p = 0.029, respectively). Neoadjuvant therapy (p = 0.003) and malnutrition (p = 0.046) remained independently associated with receiving dietetics intervention; however, 31.3% of malnourished patients had not seen a dietitian. Patients who received ≥3 dietetics appointments had lower mean (SD) percentage weight loss at the 1-month preoperative timeframe compared with patients who received 0-2 appointments (1.2 (2.0) vs. 3.1 (3.3), p = 0.001). Patients who received ONS for >2 weeks had lower mean (SD) percentage weight loss than those who did not (1.2 (1.8) vs. 2.9 (3.4), p = 0.001). In malnourished patients, total dietetics appointments ≥3 was independently associated with reduced surgical complications (odds ratio 0.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1, 0.9, p = 0.04), and ONS >2 weeks was associated with reduced LOS (regression coefficient -7.3, 95% CI -14.3, -0.3, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Despite recommendations, there are low rates of preoperative dietetics consultation and nutrition support in this population, which are associated with increased preoperative weight loss and risk of increased LOS and complications in malnourished patients. The results of this study provide insights into evidence-practice gaps for improvement and data to support further research regarding optimal methods of preoperative nutrition support.

Malnutrition screening tools in gastrointestinal cancer: A systematic review of concurrent validity.

OBJECTIVE: Malnutrition is a significant problem in gastrointestinal (GI) cancer, and accurate screening and identification is essential to ensure appropriate nutrition intervention. This study aims to determine current evidence for concurrent validity of malnutrition screening tools in GI cancer. METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken according to PRISMA guidelines, using four databases. Studies investigating the concurrent validity of malnutrition screening tools against a reference standard of Patient Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) or Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) in adult patients with GI cancer were identified. Screening, quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 checklist, and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Concurrent validity ratings were applied using predefined criteria. RESULTS: Six studies investigating concurrent validity of the Nutrition Risk Index (NRI), Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) and Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 criteria (NRS-2002) were included. There was variation in concurrent validity ratings ranging from poor-good for all tools, depending on treatment type, stage and population characteristics. CONCLUSION: Recommendations regarding the use of one tool over another could not be made. However, in the absence of a clear recommendation specific to GI cancer, screening tools that are well validated in general clinical populations should be utilised. The MST can be recommended based on validity data against the PG-SGA and SGA from other oncology populations. If indicated, malnutrition screening should then be followed by thorough nutritional assessment.

A benchmarking study of home enteral nutrition services.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients receiving home enteral nutrition (HEN) via an enteral feeding tube often have complex healthcare requirements. There is limited information regarding how HEN care is provided within Australia and New Zealand. This study aimed to investigate the characteristics of HEN services and the provision of nutrition care to individuals receiving HEN within Australia and New Zealand. METHODS: A cross-sectional study, surveying lead HEN dietitians for HEN services was conducted from the period 09 July 2019 to 20 September 2019 inclusive. An online survey was used to obtain data relating to the demographics, funding and clinical resources of respondents' HEN services. Services were benchmarked against a HEN service implementation checklist adapted from the Agency for Clinical Innovation (ACI). RESULTS: Responses were received from 107 HEN services, with an estimated combined population of 7122 HEN patients. Services were predominantly government-funded (n = 102, 95.3%) and operated from acute hospitals (n = 57, 53.3%). The reported combined cost of all HEN equipment to the patient ranged from $0-$77 per week or $0-$341 per month. Fifty-two services were reported to have a dedicated HEN dietitian/coordinator, which was positively associated with the undertaking of quality improvement activities (p = 0.019). Mean compliance to the ACI HEN implementation checklist was 70.4% (±15.7%) with a range of 13.0-98.2%. Mean compliance was significantly higher in services with a HEN dietitian/coordinator than services without one (75.5% (±12.0%) vs 64.3% (±16.6%); p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides detailed information regarding the characteristics of HEN services and nutrition care provided to enterally-fed patients across Australia and New Zealand. The majority of HEN services are not adhering to the ACI HEN service guidelines and there is considerable variation in cost burden for consumers indicating inequitable delivery of care to patients.

Anaemia and its impact on colorectal cancer patients: how can we better optimize surgical outcomes?

BACKGROUND: Anaemia is a common manifestation of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, appropriate workup prior to surgery and the effect of anaemia on outcomes have not been well defined. This study aimed to describe preoperative anaemia incidence, investigations performed, treatment and associated complications in a CRC surgical population at a single large tertiary institution in Australia. METHODS: Patients who received surgery with curative intent for CRC between 2012 and 2017 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Demographic and clinical outcome data were analysed. RESULTS: In total, 754 patients with CRC were included. Anaemia was found in 350 (46.4%) patients, of which 124 (35.4%) were microcytic, 20 (5.7%) were macrocytic and 206 (58.9%) were normocytic. Older patients were more likely to have anaemia (mean age 70.28 years, standard deviation (SD) 12.98 versus 64.74 years, SD 11.74). Only 89 patients (25.4%) were tested for iron deficiency, and of these, 76 (85.4%) were found to be iron deficient and 42 (47.7%) had low ferritin. Preoperative anaemia was associated with a higher incidence of postoperative complications (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.46, 95%, CI 1.04-2.05; P = 0.03) and a longer length of stay (LOS; average 1.8 days; 95% CI 0.3-3.3 days). CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of CRC patients had anaemia and the majority were normocytic. Only a small number of anaemic patients were tested for iron deficiency. Preoperative anaemia had an adverse effect on LOS and postoperative complications. The evaluation of anaemic patients is essential in CRC patients undergoing surgery.

The association between sarcopenia and quality of life in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery: an exploratory study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe changes in health-related quality of life (QoL) from before colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery to 1 and 3-month post-surgery in patients diagnosed pre-operatively as sarcopenic or non-sarcopenic by computed tomography (CT) analysis. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a prospective observational cohort study with one pre-operative and two post-operative assessments. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected at each timepoint using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal and the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) questionnaires. Pre-operative staging CT scans of the third lumbar vertebra (axial slice) were analysed using Slice-O-Matic Software to determine if patients had CT defined sarcopenia by employing sex-specific threshold values for skeletal muscle index. Patient-reported outcome measure scores were compared with minimal clinical important difference estimates to determine if changes were clinically significant. RESULTS: Twenty-five of 40 patients were found to be sarcopenic. The difference between sarcopenic groups on the EQ-5D was medium-sized and clinically significant, with the sarcopenic group reporting lower health status. The non-sarcopenic group displayed a clinically significant reduction in physical wellbeing post-operatively. The sarcopenic group did not demonstrate a clinically important reduction in physical wellbeing. For functional wellbeing, the sarcopenic group recorded a clinically significant reduction at the 1-month timepoint, trending back towards baseline by the 3-month timepoint. The non-sarcopenic group recorded almost no change in functional scores. CONCLUSION: This study explored the novel concept of the effect of sarcopenia on QoL in the CRC surgical setting. Clinically significant changes were identified at both post-operative timepoints. This highlights an important proof of concept that PROMs can detect meaningful clinical change in CRC patients in the context of sarcopenia and should be further explored.

Patterns of surveillance for colorectal cancer: Experience from a single large tertiary institution.

AIM: Colorectal cancer surveillance is an essential part of care and should include clinical review and follow-up investigations. There is limited information regarding postoperative surveillance and survivorship care in the Australian context. This study investigated patterns of colorectal cancer surveillance at a large tertiary institution. METHODS: A retrospective review of hospital records was conducted for all patients treated with curative surgery between January 2012 and June 2017. Provision of clinical surveillance, colonoscopy, computed tomography (CT), and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) within 24 months postoperatively were recorded. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to evaluate time-to-surveillance review and associated investigations. RESULTS: A total of 675 patients were included in the study. Median time to first postoperative clinical review was 20 days (95% confidence interval (CI), 18-21) with only 31% of patients having their first postoperative clinic review within 2 weeks. Median time to first CEA was 100 days (95% CI, 92-109), with 47% of patients having their CEA checked within the first 3 months, increasing to 68% at 6 months. Median time to first follow-up CT scan was 262 days (95% CI, 242-278) and for colonoscopy, 560 days (95% CI, 477-625). Poor uptake of surveillance testing was more prevalent in patients from older age groups, those with multiple comorbidities, and higher stage cancers. CONCLUSION: Colorectal cancer surveillance is multi-disciplinary and involves several parallel processes, many of which lead to inconsistent follow-up. Further prospective work is required to identify the reasons for variation in care and which aspects are most important to cancer patients.

Malnutrition Prevalence according to the GLIM Criteria in Head and Neck Cancer Patients Undergoing Cancer Treatment.

Malnutrition is highly prevalent in people with head and neck cancer (HCN) and is associated with poorer outcomes. However, variation in malnutrition diagnostic criteria has made translation of the most effective interventions into practice challenging. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of malnutrition in a HNC population according to the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria and assess inter-rater reliability and predictive validity. A secondary analysis of data available for 188 patients with HNC extracted from two cancer malnutrition point prevalence studies was conducted. A GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition was assigned when one phenotypic and one etiologic criterion were present. Phenotypic criteria were ≥5% unintentional loss of body weight, body mass index (BMI), and subjective evidence of muscle loss. Etiologic criteria were reduced food intake, and presence of metastatic disease as a proxy for inflammation. The prevalence of malnutrition was 22.6% (8.0% moderately malnourished; 13.3% severely malnourished). Inter-rater reliability was classified as excellent for the GLIM criteria overall, as well as for each individual criterion. A GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition was found to be significantly associated with BMI but was not predictive of 30 day hospital readmission. Further large, prospective cohort studies are required in this patient population to further validate the GLIM criteria.

Clinical Oncology Society of Australia: Position statement on cancer-related malnutrition and sarcopenia.

This position statement describes the recommendations of the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia (COSA) regarding management of cancer-related malnutrition and sarcopenia. A multidisciplinary working group completed a review of the literature, focused on evidence-based guidelines, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, to develop recommendations for the position statement. National consultation of the position statement content was undertaken through COSA members. All people with cancer should be screened for malnutrition and sarcopenia in all health settings at diagnosis and as the clinical situation changes throughout treatment and recovery. People identified as "at risk" of malnutrition or with a high-risk cancer diagnosis or treatment plan should have a comprehensive nutrition assessment; people identified as "at risk" of sarcopenia should have a comprehensive evaluation of muscle status using a combination of assessments for muscle mass, muscle strength and function. All people with cancer-related malnutrition and sarcopenia should have access to the core components of treatment, including medical nutrition therapy, targeted exercise prescription and physical and psychological symptom management. Treatment for cancer-related malnutrition and sarcopenia should be individualised, in collaboration with the multidisciplinary team (MDT), and tailored to meet needs at each stage of cancer treatment. Health services should ensure a broad range of health care professionals across the MDT have the skills and confidence to recognise malnutrition and sarcopenia to facilitate timely referrals and treatment. The position statement is expected to provide guidance at a national level to improve the multidisciplinary management of cancer-related malnutrition and sarcopenia.