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

Diagnostic Value of a Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition Criteria in Patients with Malignant Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

CONTEXT

Malnutrition is a common complication of malignant tumors, and accurate diagnosis and treatment are essential. Although the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria are widely accepted for the diagnosis of malnutrition in a variety of diseases, their diagnostic value in patients with malignant tumors is controversial.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a comprehensive analysis of studies of the GLIM criteria in patients with malignant tumors and performed a standardized meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic value of the GLIM criteria in this patient population.

DATA SOURCES

We conducted a systematic search across the PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases to identify studies utilizing the GLIM criteria for diagnosing malnutrition in cancer patients during the period from the initial adoption of the criteria in 2020 through February 29, 2024.

DATA EXTRACTION

The meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA2020 statement. Using the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) as a reference standard, we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) with 95% CI separately for the GLIM criteria. To assess the accuracy of the GLIM criteria, forest plots were drawn to summarize and present the data. The risk of bias and the methodological quality of the primary research were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool.

DATA ANALYSIS

Fifty studies were identified following the initial search of the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. Fourteen studies including a total of 14 196 cancer patients met the selection criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. With the use of the PG-SGA as a reference standard, 7640 patients with malignant tumors were diagnosed with malnutrition (prevalence of 53.8%). The GLIM criteria had an overall sensitivity of 0.69 (95% CI: 0.62-0.75), specificity of 0.84 (95% CI: 0.75-0.91), PLR of 4.42 (95% CI: 2.71-7.2), NLR of 0.37 (95% CI: 0.30-0.45), DOR of 12.90 (95% CI: 6.68-21.21), and an AUC of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.77-0.84) compared to PG-SGA.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the PG-SGA, the GLIM criteria showed good diagnostic value in patients with cancer. The GLIM criteria can be considered acceptable in clinical practice and have the potential for wider application in the future.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration No. CRD4202452675.1.

Diagnostic performance of GLIM and PG-SGA for malnutrition assessment in adult cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Consistency between malnutrition defined by Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) and Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) has not been thoroughly elucidated in patients with cancer. The study aimed to compare their consistency, and summarize the impact of malnutrition defined by GLIM on adverse outcomes.

METHOD

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to May 1, 2024. Initially, the amalgamated sensitivity, specificity and area under curve (AUC) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Subsequently, hazard ratios (HR) or odd ratios (OR) and 95% CIs for overall survival (OS), all-cause mortality, postoperative complications, disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were pooled.

RESULT

Fifty-six studies (55,767 participants) were included. Compared with PG-SGA criteria, the overall sensitivity, specificity and area under curve (AUC) for GLIM was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.63-0.78), 0.80 (95% CI: 0.65-0.90) and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.75-0.83). Subgroup analysis revealed that the diagnostic value in Asian or among patients aged under 60 years were higher than non-Asian or those aged over 60 years. Moreover, GLIM-defined malnutrition was significantly associated with overall survival (OS) [hazard ratios (HR) = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.46-1.67], all-cause mortality (HR = 1.43, 95% CI: 1.29-1.57), postoperative complications [odd ratios (OR) = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.40-1.73], disease-free survival (DFS) (OR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.36-1.68) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.10-1.72).

CONCLUSION

GLIM criteria exhibit moderate diagnostic accuracy for identifying malnutrition among patients with cancer, when compared to the PG-SGA. This accuracy is pronounced in the Asian and patients under the age of 60. Furthermore, GLIM-defined malnutrition was significantly associated with OS, DFS, RFS, all-cause mortality and postoperative complication risks in patients with cancer.

GLIM Achieves Best Diagnostic Performance in Non-Cancer Patients with Low BMI: A Hierarchical Bayesian Latent-Class Meta-Analysis

CONTEXT

Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) and Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) are commonly used nutrition assessment tools, whose performance does not reach a consensus due to different and imperfect reference standards.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of GLIM and PG-SGA, using a hierarchical Bayesian latent class model, in the absence of a gold standard.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search was undertaken in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from inception to October 2022. Diagnostic test studies comparing (1) the GLIM and/or (2) PG-SGA with "semi-gold" standard assessment tools for malnutrition were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently extracted data on sensitivity, specificity, and other key characteristics. The methodological quality of each included study was appraised according to the criteria in the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2.

DATA ANALYSIS

A total of 45 studies, comprising 20 876 individuals evaluated for GLIM and 11 575 for PG-SGA, were included. The pooled sensitivity was 0.833 (95% CI 0.744 to 0.896) for GLIM and 0.874 (0.797 to 0.925) for PG-SGA, while the pooled specificity was 0.837 (0.780 to 0.882) for GLIM and 0.778 (0.707 to 0.836) for PG-SGA. GLIM showed slightly better performance than PG-SGA, with a higher diagnostic odds ratio (25.791 vs 24.396). The diagnostic performance of GLIM was most effective in non-cancer patients with an average body mass index (BMI) of <24 kg/m2, followed by non-cancer patients with an average age of ≥60 years. PG-SGA was most powerful in cancer patients with an average age of <60 years, followed by cancer patients with an average BMI of <24 kg/m2.

CONCLUSION

Both GLIM and PG-SGA had moderately high diagnostic capabilities. GLIM was most effective in non-cancer patients with a low BMI, while PG-SGA was more applicable in cancer patients.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration No. CRD42022380409.

Enteral nutrition support in patients with cancer: association of short-term prognosis and medical costs with inflammation

BACKGROUND

Enteral nutrition (EN) is commonly used for nutritional support in patients with cancer. Whether inflammation, one of the driving factors of malnutrition and cancer, affects the association between EN and short-term prognosis and medical costs in patients with cancer remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the association between EN and short-term prognosis of patients with cancer and the effect of inflammation on EN-associated medical costs.

METHODS

This multicentre prospective cohort study evaluated patients with pathologically confirmed solid tumours. After admission, all patients who received EN, including oral or tube feeding, were assigned to the EN group. The log-rank test was used to identify the optimal cutoff values for inflammatory markers. Cox regression analysis was used to analyse the associations among EN, inflammation, and prognosis. Propensity score matching was used to balance biases between the EN and non-EN groups and validate the stability of the results.

RESULTS

A total of 5121 patients were included, with 2965 (57.90%) men and an average age of 59.06 (11.30) years. A total of 462 patients received EN, with 390 (84.4%) receiving oral nutritional supplementation. During the 90-day follow-up, 304 patients died. In the low inflammation group, there was no association between EN and short-term prognosis (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.39-2.18). In the high inflammation group, EN significantly improved the short-term prognosis (HR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.30-0.76). In patients with low inflammation (p < 0.001), EN increased hospitalisation costs (p < 0.001) without reducing length of stay (LOS) (p = 0.15). In patients with high inflammation, EN did not increase hospitalisation expenses (p = 0.47) but reduced the LOS (p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

EN can improve the short-term prognosis of patients with high inflammation and reduce LOS without increasing the hospitalisation expenses. Baseline inflammation levels may serve as effective indicators for personalised and precise EN treatment.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR1800020329 (chictr.org.cn).

Effectiveness of Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition and Subjective Global Assessment for diagnosing malnutrition and predicting wound healing in patients with diabetic foot ulcers

Malnutrition significantly hampers wound healing processes. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) and Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) in diagnosing malnutrition and predicting wound healing in patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). GLIM criteria were evaluated for sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), positive predictive value, negative predictive value and kappa (κ) against SGA as the reference. Modified Poisson regression model and the DeLong test investigated the association between malnutrition and non-healing ulcers over 6 months. This retrospective cohort study included 398 patients with DFU, with a mean age of 66·3 ± 11·9 years. According to SGA and GLIM criteria, malnutrition rates were 50·8 % and 42·7 %, respectively. GLIM criteria showed a SE of 67·3 % (95 % CI 60·4 %, 73·7 %) and SP of 82·7 % (95 % CI 76·6 %, 87·7 %) in identifying malnutrition, with a positive predictive value of 80·0 % and a negative predictive value of 71·1 % (κ = 0·50) compared with SGA. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that malnutrition, as assessed by SGA, was an independent risk factor for non-healing (relative risk (RR) 1·84, 95 % CI 1·45, 2·34), whereas GLIM criteria were associated with poorer ulcer healing in patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥ 60 ml/min/1·73m2 (RR: 1·46, 95 % CI 1·10, 1·94). SGA demonstrated a superior area under the receiver's operating characteristic curve for predicting non-healing compared with GLIM criteria (0·70 (0·65-0·75) v. 0·63 (0·58-0·65), P < 0·01). These findings suggest that both nutritional assessment tools effectively identify patients with DFU at increased risk, with SGA showing superior performance in predicting non-healing ulcers.

Association between risk of malnutrition defined by patient-generated subjective global assessment and adverse outcomes in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between the risk of malnutrition, as estimated by the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) numerical scores, and adverse outcomes in oncology patients.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTINGS

A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CKNI, VIP, Sinomed and Wanfang databases. Studies that examined the association between the risk of malnutrition, as estimated by the PG-SGA numerical scores, and overall survival (OS) or postoperative complications in oncology patients were included. Patients were classified as low risk (PG-SGA ≤ 3), medium risk (PG-SGA 4-8) and high risk of malnutrition (PG-SGA > 8).

SUBJECT

Nineteen studies reporting on twenty articles (n 9286 patients).

RESULTS

The prevalence of medium and high risk of malnutrition ranged from 16·0 % to 71·6 %. A meta-analysis showed that cancer patients with medium and high risk of malnutrition had a poorer OS (adjusted hazard ratios (HR) 1·98; 95 % CI 1·77, 2·21) compared with those with a low risk of malnutrition. Stratified analysis revealed that the pooled HR was 1·55 (95 % CI 1·17, 2·06) for medium risk of malnutrition and 2·65 (95 % CI 1·90, 3·70) for high risk of malnutrition. Additionally, the pooled adjusted OR for postoperative complications was 4·65 (95 % CI 1·61, 13·44) for patients at medium and high risk of malnutrition.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of medium and high risk of malnutrition, as estimated by the PG-SGA numerical scores, is significantly linked to poorer OS and an increased risk of postoperative complications in oncology patients.

Artificial intelligence driven malnutrition diagnostic model for patients with acute abdomen based on GLIM criteria: a cross-sectional research protocol

BACKGROUND

Patients with acute abdomen often experience reduced voluntary intake and a hypermetabolic process, leading to a high occurrence of malnutrition. The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria have rapidly developed into a principal methodological tool for nutritional diagnosis. Additionally, machine learning is emerging to establish artificial intelligent-enabled diagnostic models, but the accuracy and robustness need to be verified. We aimed to establish an intelligence-enabled malnutrition diagnosis model based on GLIM for patients with acute abdomen.

METHOD

This study is a single-centre, cross-sectional observational investigation into the prevalence of malnutrition in patients with acute abdomen using the GLIM criteria. Data collection occurs on the day of admission, at 3 and 7 days post-admission, including biochemical analysis, body composition indicators, disease severity scoring, nutritional risk screening, malnutrition diagnosis and nutritional support information. The occurrence rate of malnutrition in patients with acute abdomen is analysed with the GLIM criteria based on the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 and the Mini Nutritional Assessment Short-Form to investigate the sensitivity and accuracy of the GLIM criteria. After data cleansing and preprocessing, a machine learning approach is employed to establish a predictive model for malnutrition diagnosis in patients with acute abdomen based on the GLIM criteria.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has obtained ethical approval from the Ethics Committee of the Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences and Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital on 28 November 2022 (Yan-2022-442). The results of this study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, at scientific conferences and directly to study participants.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2200067044.

Prevalence of Malnutrition in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Comparative Study of GLIM Criteria, NRS2002, and PG-SGA, and Identification of Independent Risk Factors

AIM

Malnutrition is prevalent in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, linked to poor outcomes, necessitating early intervention. This study aimed to investigate malnutrition in HCC patients, assess Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002) and Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) vs. Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria, and identify independent risk factors.

METHOD

A cross-sectional retrospective study was conducted on 207 patients with HCC. Nutritional screening/assessment results and blood samples were collected within 72 h of admission. This study assessed the prevalence of malnutrition using the NRS-2002 and PG-SGA and retrospectively using the GLIM criteria. The performance of the screening tools was evaluated using kappa (K) values. Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine whether laboratory parameters were associated with malnutrition as identified by the GLIM criteria.

RESULTS

Of the participants, 30.4% were at risk of malnutrition according to NRS-2002. The agreement between the NRS-2002 and GLIM criteria was substantial. The GLIM criteria and PG-SGA diagnosed malnutrition in 43 and 54.6% of the participants, respectively. Age, anemia, and ascites correlated with malnutrition in regression.

CONCLUSION

The GLIM criteria, along with NRS-2002 and PG-SGA, aid in diagnosing malnutrition in HCC patients. Recognizing risk factors improves accuracy, enabling timely interventions for better outcomes.

Bayesian diagnostic test evaluation and true prevalence estimation of malnutrition in gastric cancer patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Malnutrition is prevalent among gastric cancer (GC) patients, necessitating early assessment of nutritional status to guide monitoring and interventions for improved outcomes. We aim to evaluate the accuracy and prognostic capability of three nutritional tools in GC patients, providing insights for clinical implementation.

METHODS

The present study is an analysis of data from 1308 adult GC patients recruited in a multicenter from July 2013 to July 2018. Nutritional status was assessed using Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002), Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) and Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria. Bayesian latent class model (LCM) estimated the malnutrition prevalence of GC patients, sensitivity and specificity of nutritional tools. Cox regression model analyzed the relationship between nutritional status and overall survival (OS) in GC patients.

RESULTS

Among 1308 GC patients, NRS-2002, PG-SGA, and GLIM identified 50.46%, 76.76%, and 68.81% as positive, respectively. Bayesian LCM analysis revealed that PG-SGA had the highest sensitivity (0.96) for malnutrition assessment, followed by GLIM criteria (0.78) and NRS-2002 (0.65). Malnutrition or being at risk of malnutrition were identified as independent prognostic factors for OS. Use any of these tools improved survival prediction in TNM staging system.

CONCLUSION

PG-SGA is the most reliable tool for diagnosing malnutrition in GC patients, whereas NRS-2002 is suitable for nutritional screening in busy clinical practice. Given the lower sensitivity of NRS-2002, direct utilization of GLIM for nutritional assessment may be necessary. Each nutritional tool should be associated with a specific course of action, although further research is needed.

Malnutrition diagnosed by GLIM criteria better predicts long-term outcomes for patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: A prospective multicenter cohort study

Since Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) method was proposed, few studies have applied these new criteria to hematological tumors. In this study, we explored the prevalence of malnutrition according to the GLIM criteria and scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (sPG-SGA) and their association with 1-year, 3-year and 5-year mortality among patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). Malnutrition of all patients were assessed by GLIM criteria and sPG-SGA. Relationship between the malnutrition based on GLIM criteria or sPG-SGA and mortality was investigated by Cox regression analyses. The performance of GLIM criteria was evaluated by assessing the sensitivity, specificity, k-value, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and time-dependent ROC. Of 963 patients with NHL, the prevalence of malnutrition was 38.8% with GLIM criteria, 65.3% with GLIM-omitted NRS-2002 and 53.2% with sPG-SGA. In comparison with sPG-SGA, the sensitivity of GLIM criteria was 61.7%, the specificity was 84.8%, and the agreement was moderate (k = 0.48, p < 0.001). Malnutrition based on GLIM criteria could also predict 3-year and 5-year mortality after adjusting for confounders, except for sPG-SGA (HR = 1.816, 95%CI = 1.274-2.589, p = 0.001 for 3-year mortality; HR = 1.707, 95%CI = 1.223-2.382, p = 0.002 for 5-year mortality). For patients with NHL, GLIM criteria could be applied as an effective replacement to sPG-SGA for nutrition assessment and mortality prediction, especially for predicting long-term prognostic outcomes.

Clinical nutrition in surgical oncology: Young AIOM-AIRO-SICO multidisciplinary national survey on behalf of NutriOnc research group

Malnutrition is a common condition in cancer patients which is usually associated with functional limitations, as well as increased morbidity and mortality. Based on the support of the young sections of Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM), Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) and Italian Society of Surgical Oncology (SICO) merged into the NutriOnc Research Group, we performed a multidisciplinary national survey with the aim to define the awareness of nutritional issues among healthcare professionals delivering anticancer care. The questionnaire was organized in four sections, as follows: Knowledge and practices regarding Nutritional Management of cancer patients; Timing of screening and assessment of Nutritional Status; Nutritional Treatment and prescription criteria; Immunonutrition and educational topics. The modules focused on esophagogastric, hepato-bilio-pancreatic and colorectal malignancies. Overall, 215 physicians completed the survey. As regards the management of Nutritional Status of cancer patients, many responders adopted the ERAS program (49.3%), while a consistent number of professionals did not follow a specific validated nutritional care protocol (41.8%), mainly due to lack of educational courses (14.5%) and financial support (15.3%). Nearly all the included institutions had a multidisciplinary team (92%) to finalize the treatment decision-making. Cancer patients routinely underwent nutritional screening according to 57.2% of interviewed physicians. The timing of nutritional assessment was at diagnosis (37.8%), before surgery (25.9%), after surgery (16.7%), before radiochemotherapy (13.5%) and after radiochemotherapy (7%). Most of the responders reported that nutritional status was assessed throughout the duration of cancer treatments (55.6%). An important gap between current delivery and need of nutritional assessment persists. The development of specific and defined care protocols and the adherence to these tools may be the key to improving nutritional support management in clinical practice.

Predictive validity of GLIM malnutrition diagnosis in patients with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Considering that the validation of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) remains unclear in patients with colorectal cancer, the present study aimed to assess the agreement, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and prognostic effect of the GLIM on survival when compared with the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA).

METHODS

Patients with colorectal cancer who were scheduled to undergo a routine abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan were recruited. Using the GLIM two-step approach, the patients were first screened for malnutrition by using the PG-SGA Short Form (score ≥3). The malnutrition diagnosis was based on the etiologic (disease burden [cancer] or reduced food intake) and phenotypic GLIM criteria, including weight loss, body mass index, and skeletal muscle index at the third lumbar vertebra when using the CT scans. The food intake was assessed by the PG-SGA.

RESULTS

This study included 191 patients (age, 60.5 ± 11.3 years; 57% men), and 23% and 32% were malnourished according to the GLIM and the PG-SGA, respectively. The GLIM revealed fair sensitivity (64%), good agreement (kappa = 0.65), specificity (96%), and diagnostic accuracy for detecting malnutrition (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72-0.88) when compared with the PG-SGA. The malnutrition value according to the GLIM and the PG-SGA was associated with short-term survival. However, only the PG-SGA was associated with long-term survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Although showing fair sensitivity, the GLIM had good agreement, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy for malnutrition detection and was an independent predictor of short-term survival in patients with colorectal cancer.

Accuracy of the GLIM criteria for diagnosing malnutrition: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Although malnutrition remains a global public health concern, and has proved to be a major contributor to death and illness, there has been a foundational lack of a gold standard for diagnostic testing for clinical application. The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria were established to normalize the diagnosis of malnutrition, but their use remains controversial. Therefore, we carried out a meta-analysis based on the published literature to assess the accuracy of the GLIM criteria for diagnosing malnutrition.

METHODS

We utilized publication databases (including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE) to acquire research studies published from the initial use of the GLIM criteria in 2019 until January 22, 2022 that used the criteria to diagnose malnutrition. We conducted this meta-analysis with reference to the recommendations from the PRISMA-DTA statement. We separately calculated the amalgamated sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and AUC with 95%CI for the GLIM criteria. Then, we aggregated and presented the data by drawing forest plots to assess the real accuracy of the criteria. A subgroup analysis was also carried out to identify the potential sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

After the initial search of the CENTRAL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases, a total of 451 unique studies were identified. Twenty studies met our selection standards and 10,781 total patients were included in the meta-analysis. We noted that 4761 of the 10,781 patients (44.2%) were malnourished. The amalgamated sensitivity of the GLIM criteria was 0.72 (95%CI, 0.64-0.78), the specificity was 0.82 (95%CI, 0.72-0.88), the PLR was 3.9 (95%CI, 2.6-6.1), NLR was 0.35 (95%CI, 0.27-0.44), DOR was 11 (95%CI, 6-20), and AUC was 0.82 (95%CI, 0.79-0.85). Based on the results of a subgroup analysis using the SGA as a reference standard, the GLIM criteria had better diagnostic value (sensitivity, 0.81; specificity, 0.80; DOR, 17; AUC, 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

The GLIM criteria have high diagnostic accuracy for distinguishing patients with malnutrition, and the GLIM criteria seem to have the potential to be used as a gold standard for diagnosing malnutrition in clinical practice. Moreover, the subgroup analysis showed a better diagnostic value for the GLIM criteria compared to the SGA used as a reference standard. Large-scale diagnostic trials and additional refinements to simplify the criteria are urgently needed to increase the clinical utilization of the GLIM criteria in the future.

Correlation Between Components of Malnutrition Diagnosed by Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition Criteria and the Clinical Outcomes in Gastric Cancer Patients: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Objective

Malnutrition is recognized as a risk factor for poor outcome in patients with gastric cancer (GC). In 2018, the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) published standardized criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition. Our aim was to investigate whether any of the components of the GLIM diagnostic criteria were related to worse clinical outcomes in patients with GC.

Methods

This study analyzed patients with GC who underwent radical gastrectomy in our hospital between 2014 and 2019. A preoperative nutritional assessment was performed for each patient. Matching was based on the presence of three GLIM components: high weight loss (WL), low body mass index (BMI), and low skeletal muscle index (SMI).

Results

The analysis included 1,188 patients, including 241 (20.3%) with high WL, 156 (13.1%) with low BMI, and 355 (29.9%) with low SMI. Before matching, patients who met the GLIM component criteria were mostly associated with older age, low nutritional reserves, and late tumor progression. After matching, the clinical characteristics of the three cohorts were balanced. In the matched queue, the survival prognosis of the high WL group was worse than that of the non-WL group, and the postoperative complication rate was higher in the low SMI group than in the normal SMI group (P <0.05). In addition, the clinical outcomes in the low and normal BMI groups were similar (P >0.05).

Conclusion

Of the GLIM criteria, high WL and low SMI may be associated with poor clinical outcomes in patients with GC, while a low BMI may not be associated with outcome.

Association between the Lymphocyte-to-C-Reactive Protein Ratio and Survival Outcomes in Cancer Patients with GLIM-Defined Malnutrition: A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

This study assessed the prognostic value of LCR in patients with cancer-associated malnutrition (CAM). Systemic inflammatory markers, particularly the lymphocyte-to-C-reactive protein ratio (LCR), are related to the survival of patients with CAM. The present retrospective analysis based on a prospective multicenter cohort study, which involved 1,437 hospitalized patients with CAM.

METHODS

The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of ten inflammatory indicators-LCR, advanced lung cancer inflammation index, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, prognostic nutritional index, modified Glasgow prognostic score, systemic immune-inflammation index, albumin-to-globulin ratio, LCR score, glucose-to-lymphocyte ratio, and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio-were constructed. Nutritional status, blood markers, and quality of life (QoL) were evaluated within 48 h of admission. The overall survival (OS) was evaluated from September 1 to December 29, 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 1,431 cancer patients diagnosed with malnutrition based on the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria. Male patients were 62.8% of all, and the mean age was 60.66 years old. The AUC of LCR was higher than that of other inflammatory markers. The restricted cubic spline (RCS) of the Hazard ratios (HRs) showed an inverse L-shaped relationship with LCR. In addition, patients with low LCR had significantly poorer OS than those with high LCR. The addition of LCR to the model increased the predictive ability of 1-year mortality (AUC increase of 0.036), 3-year mortality (AUC increase of 0.038), and 5-year mortality (AUC increase of 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Assessing the LCR can help the medical staff identify cancer patients with nutritional deficiency at high risk of oncological outcomes and develop individualized therapeutic strategies.

Strategies to Mitigate Chemotherapy and Radiation Toxicities That Affect Eating

Background: Cancer and its therapy is commonly associated with a variety of side effects that impact eating behaviors that reduce nutritional intake. This review will outline potential causes of chemotherapy and radiation damage as well as approaches for the amelioration of the side effects of cancer during therapy. Methods: Information for clinicians, patients, and their caregivers about toxicity mitigation including nausea reduction, damage to epithelial structures such as skin and mucosa, organ toxicity, and education is reviewed. Results: How to anticipate, reduce, and prevent some toxicities encountered during chemotherapy and radiation is detailed with the goal to improve eating behaviors. Strategies for health care professionals, caregivers, and patients to consider include (a) the reduction in nausea and vomiting, (b) decreasing damage to the mucosa, (c) avoiding a catabolic state and muscle wasting (sarcopenia), and (d) developing therapeutic alliances with patients, caregivers, and oncologists. Conclusions: Although the reduction of side effects involves anticipatory guidance and proactive team effort (e.g., forward observation, electronic interactions, patient reported outcomes), toxicity reduction can be satisfying for not only the patient, but everyone involved in cancer care.