Nutritional Support Indications in Gastroesophageal Cancer Patients: From Perioperative to Palliative Systemic Therapy. A Comprehensive Review of the Last Decade

Utilising systematic reviews to assess potential overtreatment and claim for better evidence-based research: an analysis of anticancer drugs versus supportive care in advanced esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Highlighting the identified gaps in evidence-based research concerning advanced esophageal cancer (EC) treatment and care, this review evaluates the efficacy and safety of anticancer drugs compared to supportive care for advanced EC patients, aiming to assess the appropriateness of usual treatments and identify the gaps that need to be filled with primary research.

METHODS

We searched (May 2022) MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Epistemonikos, and trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and PROSPERO) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing anticancer drugs (chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or biological/targeted therapy) with supportive care in advanced EC. The results were summarised using GRADE summary of finding tables.

RESULTS

We included 15 RCTs. Most studies did not have a special focus on EC, did not detail the treatment lines in all patients, and did not evaluate all outcomes. Anticancer drugs may result in a slight increase in overall survival (OS) (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.71, 0.86; MD 0.83 months) and better progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 0.56 95% CI 0.49, 0.64, MD 0.68 months), but also may increase toxicity (RR 1.37; 95% CI 1.13, 1.65), without a significant improvement in quality of life. The certainty of evidence was low or very low due to indirectness of results and lack of specific focus on EC in some studies.

CONCLUSION

RCTs on advanced EC lack specificity, detailed treatment line information, and evaluation of all relevant outcomes. Moreover, when they find any benefit, this is negligible. Therefore, the certainty to justify anticancer drug treatments instead of supportive care in advanced EC is low or very low, and this information should be actively shared with affected patients. More and better RCTs should be conducted to assess whether any old or new proposed treatment for advanced EC patients provides a better balance of benefits and harms than the supportive care.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

The study protocol was registered in OSF ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/7CHX6 ) on 2022-03-29.

Clinical Impact of the C-reactive Protein-albumin-lymphocyte Index in Post-gastrectomy Patients With Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

Recently, preoperative inflammatory, immune, and nutritional statuses have attracted attention as prognostic factors in post-curative gastrectomy patients with gastric cancer (GC). The usefulness of the C-reactive protein-albumin-lymphocyte (CALLY) index as a prognostic factor in patients with various cancers, has been reported. However, reports on the clinical significance of the CALLY index in patients with GC after gastrectomy remain inadequate. In this prospective study, we focused on the preoperative CALLY index and investigated its usefulness as a prognostic factor in patients with GC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study included 459 patients who underwent gastrectomy for GC between December 2013 and November 2017 at Kanagawa Cancer Center, Kanagawa, Japan. The preoperative CALLY index was calculated based on the preoperative blood test data. Patients were divided into high- and low-CALLY groups. The associations of the preoperative CALLY scores with clinicopathological factors, overall survival (OS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) after gastrectomy for GC were evaluated.

RESULTS

The low-CALLY group was significantly older, had higher venous invasion, and a more progressive pStage than did the high-CALLY group. OS and RFS after gastrectomy in the low-CALLY group were significantly worse than those in the high-CALLY group (77.9% vs. 88.9%; p<0.001 and 73.8% vs. 87.1%; p<0.001, respectively). In the multivariate analysis, a low CALLY score was an independent prognostic factor of worse OS and RFS.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative CALLY levels may be a useful prognostic predictor in patients with GC after curative gastrectomy.

German, Austrian, and Swiss guidelines for systemic treatment of gastric cancer

The updated edition of the German, Austrian and Swiss Guidelines for Systemic Treatment of Gastric Cancer was completed in August 2023, incorporating new evidence that emerged after publication of the previous edition. It consists of a text-based "Diagnosis" part and a "Therapy" part including recommendations and treatment algorithms. The treatment part includes a comprehensive description regarding perioperative and palliative systemic therapy for gastric cancer and summarizes recommended standard of care for surgery and endoscopic resection. The guidelines are based on a literature search and evaluation by a multidisciplinary panel of experts nominated by the hematology and oncology scientific societies of the three involved countries.

Identification of prognostic nutritional index as a reliable prognostic indicator for advanced lung cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors

Background

Prognostic nutritional index (PNI) has been identified as a reliable prognostic factor for cancer adjuvant therapy. However, its prognostic value in lung cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remains inconclusive.

Method

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was performed based on online databases before March 1th 2023. The correlation of PNI with overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) was determined using the hazard ratios (HRs) coupled with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Then, a retrospective cohort enrolling 123 ICI-treated lung cancer patients from two hospitals was utilized for validation and further investigation.

Results

A total of 14 studies enrolling 1,260 lung cancer patients were included in the meta-analysis. The high PNI level was significantly correlated with better OS (HR = 2.56, 95% CI = 1.86-3.54) and PFS (HR = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.53-2.40) of the lung cancer patients. The subgroup analysis confirmed the results except for the PFS in patients receiving anti-PD-1 therapy (HR = 1.51, 95% CI = 0.86-2.65). In the retrospective study, the high PNI level was identified as a favorable factor for OS and PFS not only in the whole cohort but also in the subgroups stratified by non-small cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer. The high PNI was also correlated with better anti-cancer therapy response and performed better than body mass index and serum albumin level in OS prediction. Finally, we established a novel prognostic nomogram based on PNI and other clinical parameters. The nomogram was found to perform well in predicting the 1-year OS of ICI-treated lung cancer patients.

Conclusion

Both the meta-analysis and retrospective work demonstrate the PNI is a reliable prognostic factor for advanced lung cancer patients receiving ICI-based therapies. Our study further highlights the crucial role of nutrition assessment and intervention in cancer immunotherapy.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42023424146.

Multidisciplinary treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Introduction

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of multidisciplinary treatment for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) who underwent radical gastrectomy.

Patients and Methods

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness of surgery alone, adjuvant chemotherapy (CT), adjuvant radiotherapy (RT), adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), neoadjuvant CT, neoadjuvant RT, neoadjuvant CRT, perioperative CT and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for LAGC were searched. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), recurrence and metastasis, long-term mortality, adverse events (grade ≥3), operative complications and R0 resection rate were used as outcome indicators for meta-analysis.

Results

Forty-five RCTs with 10077 participants were finally analysed. Adjuvant CT had higher OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.74, 95% credible interval [CI] = 0.66-0.82) and DFS (HR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.60-0.74) than surgery-alone group. Perioperative CT (odds ratio [OR] = 2.56, 95% CI = 1.19-5.50) and adjuvant CT (OR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.27-0.86) both had more recurrence and metastasis than HIPEC + adjuvant CT, while adjuvant CRT tended to have less recurrence and metastasis than adjuvant CT (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.29-2.42) and even adjuvant RT (OR = 1.83, 95% CI = 0.98-3.40). Moreover, the incidence of mortality in HIPEC + adjuvant CT was lower than that in adjuvant RT (OR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.11-0.72), adjuvant CT (OR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.23-0.86) and perioperative CT (OR = 2.39, 95% CI = 1.05-5.41). Analysis of adverse events (grade ≥3) showed no statistically significant difference between any two adjuvant therapy groups.

Conclusion

A combination of HIPEC with adjuvant CT seems to be the most effective adjuvant therapy, which contributes to reducing tumour recurrence, metastasis and mortality - without increasing surgical complications and adverse events related to toxicity. Compared with CT or RT alone, CRT can reduce recurrence, metastasis and mortality but increase adverse events. Moreover, neoadjuvant therapy can effectively improve the radical resection rate, but neoadjuvant CT tends to increase surgical complications.

Assessing the Effects of a Perioperative Nutritional Support and Counseling in Gastrointestinal Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Comparative Study with Historical Controls

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of perioperative nutritional therapy care in gastrointestinal (esophageal, gastric, gastroesophageal) cancer patients on nutritional status and disease progression (complications, hospitalization, mortality). We considered 62 gastrointestinal cancer patients treated at the Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), University Hospital Bonn, Germany (August 2017-July 2019). Of these, 42 patients (as intervention group: IG) received pre- and postoperative nutritional support with counseling, while 20 patients (as historical control group CG) received only postoperative nutritional therapy. Several clinical parameters, such as Body Mass Index (BMI), nutritional risk screening (NRS), phase angle, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and mortality, were determined. There were significantly fewer patients with gastric cancer/CDH1 gene mutation and more with esophageal cancer in IG (p = 0.001). Significantly more patients received neoadjuvant therapy in IG (p = 0.036). No significant differences were found between the groups regarding BMI, NRS, complications, length of hospital stay, and mortality. However, the comparison of post- and preoperative parameters in IG showed a tendency to lose 1.74 kg of weight (p = 0.046), a decrease in phase angle by 0.59° (p = 0.004), and an increase in NRS of 1.34 points (p < 0.001). Contrary to prior reports, we found no significant effect of perioperative nutritional therapy care in gastrointestinal cancer patients; however, the small cohort size and infrequent standardization in nutritional status may possibly account for the variance. Considering that oncological pathways and metabolic nutritional pathways are interrelated, dividing patients into subgroups to provide a personalized nutritional approach may help in improving their treatment.

Malnutrition management in oncology: An expert view on controversial issues and future perspectives

Cancer and anticancer treatments can lead to several negative side effects, including malnutrition. Despite the recognized need for adequate nutritional support in cancer patients, in daily clinical practice, nutrition is still not considered one of the first aspects to be considered. Malnutrition negatively affects the clinical outcomes, treatment response, and overall survival of cancer patients. In this study, three of the most controversial issues related to malnutrition, which emerged during an Italian Consensus Conference, were addressed specifically for patients with head and neck as well as gastrointestinal cancer. The timing of nutritional evaluation and intervention, extension of the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS^®) protocols, and cost-effectiveness of nutritional interventions have been considered. This study aimed to illustrate the state-of-the art of each issue and hypothesize future perspectives and actions to be taken, trying to suggest a new nutritional management model for cancer patients in Italy that overcomes the critical issues encountered. Of note, the timely diagnosis of nutritional issue appears to be essential to ensure the correct management of malnourished cancer patients as well as those who are at high risk of malnutrition. Standardized protocols, screening tests, and the inclusion of nutritional parameters in patient medical records would help to achieve good clinical outcomes. Finally, appropriate nutritional support is also associated with cost savings, and it seems necessary to promote its clinical and economic value to obtain improvements in both outcomes and management costs.

Third- and Late Line Treatments of Metastatic Gastric Cancer: Still More to Be Done

In recent years, advances of anticancer and supportive therapies have determined a gradual improvement in survival rates and patients’ general conditions in metastatic gastric cancer (mGC), allowing them to receive further treatments. The choice of treatment is driven by performance status, age, stage of disease, number of metastatic sites and time from the first to third line of treatment. Targets such as microsatellite instability, PD-L1 expression, and HER2 overexpression or amplification may be addressed to personalise treatment and prolong survival. Despite a growing number of third line options that have provided clinicians with greater opportunities to customise treatments, up to date few agents have been demonstrated as effective after two standard lines for mGC; for these reasons, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy were all widely investigated in both phase II and phase III studies. Overall, TAS-102, apatinib, regorafenib, nilotinib, trastuzumab, and pembrolizumab were demonstrated to be valid options in the third line scenario for mGC patient refractory to at least two lines of therapy. A multimodal approach based on chemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted agents, a personalised nutritional programme as well as the research of new predictive biomarkers may pave the way to new strategies to identify the best treatment for each patient.

Prognostic Value of the Pre-Treatment Prognostic Nutritional Index for Patients with Unresectable Locally-Advanced and Advanced Stage Upper Gastrointestinal Tract Cancer

Purpose

The prognostic nutritional index (PNI) is used to distinguish immune-nutritional status. Previous studies have shown that it is significantly associated with patient outcomes for various malignancies. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic impact of PNI in patients with unresectable locally-advanced and advanced stage upper gastrointestinal tract cancer, including esophageal cancer and gastric cancer.

Methods

A retrospective study of 170 unresectable stage III–IV esophageal cancer and gastric cancer patients was conducted from January 2018 to December 2020. In our retrospective analysis, the pretreatment PNI of patients was calculated and analyzed. The Youden index was estimated to select the optimal cut-off value for PNI. Univariate and multivariate flexible parametric proportional hazards models with restricted cubic splines (RCS) were used to identify independent prognostic factors, and the Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate survival curves.

Results

The median follow-up period was 5 months (ranging from 0.06 to 36.92 months). We determined 52.9 as the cut-off value by using the maximum Youden index. Subsequently, patients in the testing group were classified into high PNI and low PNI groups. Kaplan–Meier curves showed the low PNI group had significantly poorer overall survival (OS) than the high PNI group. Median OS in the low PNI group was 4.43 months compared with 8.23 months in the high PNI group (HR 2.42, 95% CI 1.33–4.40, p = 0.004). In the univariate analysis, low PNI, ECOG PS 2, and ECOG PS 3–4 were associated with OS. According to multivariate analysis, low PNI was an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR 2.31, 95% CI 1.24–4.29, p = 0.008).

Conclusion

Pretreatment PNI is useful for independent prognosis of unresectable stage III–IV esophageal cancer and gastric cancer in patients.

Vitamin B12 supplementation post-gastrectomy: a service closed-loop audit at St. James's Hospital, Dublin

Background

Vitamin B₁₂ (VB12) deficiency is a well-described complication post-gastrectomy. It is caused by the loss of parietal cell mass leading to megaloblastic anaemia. This closed-loop audit assesses patient understanding of and adherence with VB12 supplementation guidelines post-gastrectomy.

Methods

A closed-loop audit cycle was performed. After the first cycle, an educational intervention was actioned prior to re-audit. One hundred twenty-five patients who underwent gastrectomy between 2010 and 2020 were available for study (86 total gastrectomies (TG), 39 subtotal gastrectomies (STG)). Twenty-nine patients who had not been adherent with VB12 supplementation/surveillance were eligible for re-audit.

Results

91.9% (79/86) of TG patients reported adherence in regular parenteral VB12 supplementation. Adherence was significantly lower for STG for checking (and/or replacing) their VB12, with only 53.8% (21/39) checking their VB12 levels. 67/125 (53.6%) of the patients stated that they knew it was important to supplement B₁₂ post-gastrectomy. 37.8% (43/113) of participants could explain why this was important, and 14.4% (18/125) had any knowledge of the complications of VB12 deficiency. Following re-audit, 5/8 (57.5%) of TG patients who had not been adherent with VB12 supplementation in the first cycle were now adherent with VB12 supplementation following our educational intervention. 7/17 (41.2%) of the STG group had received VB12 or made arrangements to receive supplemental VB12 if it was indicated.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates good adherence in those undergoing TG. Patient understanding correlates with adherence, suggesting that patient education and knowledge reinforcement may be key to adherence with VB12 supplementation. A simple educational intervention can improve adherence with VB12 supplementation in patients undergoing gastrectomy.

Body composition dynamics and impact on clinical outcome in gastric and gastro-esophageal junction cancer patients undergoing perioperative chemotherapy with the FLOT protocol

PURPOSE

Perioperative chemotherapy with FLOT constitutes a standard of care approach for locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. We aimed at investigating anthropometric, CT-based and FDG-PET-based body composition parameters and dynamics during this multidisciplinary approach and the impact on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective, single-center study was based on medical records and (FDG-PET)-CT images among gastric/GEJ cancer patients undergoing perioperative FLOT chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Between 2016 and 2021, 46 gastric/GEJ cancer patients started perioperative FLOT at our tertiary cancer center (Salzburg, Austria). At a median follow-up of 32 months median PFS was 47.4 months and median OS was not reached. The skeletal muscle index (SMI, cm²/m²) turned out to be the only body composition parameter with a statistically significant decrease during pre-operative FLOT (51.3 versus 48.8 cm²/m², p = 0.02). Neither pre-FLOT body mass index (BMI), nor SMI had an impact on the duration of pre-operative FLOT, the time interval from pre-operative FLOT initiation to surgery, the necessity of pre-operative or post-operative FLOT de-escalation or the likelihood of the start of postoperative chemotherapy. Pre-FLOT BMI (overweight versus normal, HR: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.02-0.65, p = 0.02) and pre-FLOT SMI (sarcopenia versus no sarcopenia, HR: 5.08, 95% CI: 1.27-20.31, p = 0.02) were statistically significantly associated with PFS in the multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

The statistically significant SMI loss during pre-operative FLOT and the meaningful impact of baseline SMI and BMI on PFS argue for the implementation of a nutritional screening and support program prior to the initiation of pre-operative FLOT in clinical routine.

Clinical and economic value of oral nutrition supplements in patients with cancer: a position paper from the Survivorship Care and Nutritional Support Working Group of Alliance Against Cancer

Malnutrition is a common clinical and public health problem that can frequently affect patients in hospital and community settings. In particular, cancer-related malnutrition results from a combination of metabolic dysregulation and anorexia, caused both by the tumor itself and by its treatment. Patients with head-neck cancer, or with gastroesophageal, pancreatic, lung, and colorectal cancer, are particularly at risk of developing malnutrition, with a prevalence varying between 30 and 50% depending on tumor location and anti-cancer treatment complications. Prevention and adequate management of malnutrition is now considered an essential key point of therapeutic pathways of patients with cancer, with the aim to enhance their quality of life, reduce complications, and improve clinical outcomes. Oral nutritional supplements (ONS) are part of the nutritional therapy and represent an effective tool to address cancer-related malnutrition, as supported by growing literature data. However, patients' access to ONS - which is regulated by different national and regional policies in terms of reimbursement - is quite heterogeneous. This narrative review aims to summarize the current knowledge about the role of ONS in terms of cost-effectiveness in the management of actively treated patients with cancer, following surgery and/or radiotherapy/chemotherapy treatment and to present the position on this issue of the Alliance Against Cancer, the Italian National Oncology Network, coming up from a focused virtual roundtable of the Survivorship Care and Nutritional Support Working Group.

The Role of Prehabilitation in Modern Esophagogastric Cancer Surgery: A Comprehensive Review

Simple Summary

Surgery is the only potentially curative treatment option for esophagogastric cancer. Although esophagectomy/gastrectomy remains associated with major surgical trauma and significant morbidity. Prehabilitation has emerged as a novel strategy to improve postoperative outcomes by preparing patients for a surgery-associated physiological challenge. We discuss current knowledge and the results of studies on the role of prehabilitation in esophagogastric cancer surgery.

Abstract

Esophagogastric cancer is among the most common malignancies worldwide. Surgery with or without neoadjuvant therapy is the only potentially curative treatment option. Although esophagogastric resections remain associated with major surgical trauma and significant postoperative morbidity. Prehabilitation has emerged as a novel strategy to improve clinical outcomes by optimizing physical and psychological status before major surgery through exercise and nutritional and psychological interventions. Current prehabilitation programs may be unimodal, including only one intervention, or multimodal, combining the benefits of different types of interventions. However, it still is an investigational treatment option mostly limited to clinical trials. In this comprehensive review, we summarize the current evidence for the role of prehabilitation in modern esophagogastric cancer surgery. The available studies are very heterogeneous in design, type of interventions, and measured outcomes. Yet, all of them confirm at least some positive effects of prehabilitation in terms of improved physical performance, nutritional status, quality of life, or even reduced postoperative morbidity. However, the optimal interventions for prehabilitation remain unclear; thus, they cannot be standardized and widely adopted. Future studies on multimodal prehabilitation are necessary to develop optimal programs for patients with esophagogastric cancer.

Effect of Home Enteral Nutritional Support Compared With Normal Oral Diet in Postoperative Subjects With Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Resection: A Meta-Analysis

Introduction

We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the influence of a home enteral nutritional support compared with a normal oral diet in postoperative subjects with upper gastrointestinal cancer resection.

Methods

A systematic literature search up to December 2021 was done and 23 studies included 3,010 subjects with upper gastrointestinal cancer resection at the start of the study; 1,556 of them were given home enteral nutritional support and 1,454 were normal oral diet. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% CIs to evaluate the influence of home enteral nutritional support compared with a normal oral diet in postoperative subjects with upper gastrointestinal cancer resection by the dichotomous or continuous methods with a random or fixed-influence model.

Results

Home enteral nutritional support had significantly higher quality of life (MD, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.50–2.67, p &lt; 0.001), better body weight change (MD, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.31–2.43, p &lt; 0.001), higher albumin (MD, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.72–1.82, p &lt; 0.001), and higher pre-albumin (MD, 30.79; 95% CI, 7.29–54.29, p = 0.01) compared to the normal oral diet in subjects with upper gastrointestinal cancer resection. However, home enteral nutritional support had no significant impact on the hemoglobin (MD, 4.64; 95% CI, −4.17 to 13.46, p = 0.30), and complications (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.76–1.40, p = 0.83) compared to the normal oral diet in subjects with upper gastrointestinal cancer resection.

Conclusions

Home enteral nutritional support had a significantly higher quality of life, better body weight change, higher albumin, and higher pre-albumin, and had no significant impact on the hemoglobin and complications compared to the normal oral diet in subjects with upper gastrointestinal cancer resection. Further studies are required.

Evaluating malnutrition in cancer patients in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Malnutrition is an important contributing factor to mortality in cancer patients. Several scoring systems can be used to evaluate malnutrition in cancer patients. We hypothesized that one or more of these scoring systems should be used to assess malnutrition in emergency departments (EDs).

METHODS

This prospective observational study was conducted in the ED of a tertiary care center. From October 1, 2019, to March 31, 2020, we prospectively collected data on cancer patients aged 18 and over who were evaluated in the ED but did not present with any nutrition-related complaint, and not had any prior nutritional support. Malnutrition levels were determined using the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA¹) instrument. The patients were grouped according to the presence and degree of malnutrition (PG-SGA categories A and B vs PG-SGA category C) and their need for nutritional intervention according to the Nutritional Triage Recommendation Scores (NTRS² < 9 vs NTRS ≥9).

RESULTS

Twelve female (31.5%) and 26 male (68.5%) cancer patients, with a mean age of 70.29 ± 11.49 years, were enrolled in the study. According to the PG-SGA, 84.2% of the patients were at risk for malnutrition, and 97.4% required nutritional intervention. Thirty patients (78.9%) had experienced problems with eating in the preceding two weeks. There were statistically significant differences in these patients' body mass indexes (BMIs) (25.46 ± 4.3 kg/m² vs 20.95 ± 3.66 kg/m², p < 0.05) and ages (64.6 ± 10.5 years vs 74.9 ± 10.3 years, p < 0.05) according to the PG-SGA. There were also statistically significant differences between the patients' BMIs (25.73 ± 3.51 kg/m² vs 22.11 ± 4.50 kg/m², p < 0.05), according to the NTRS. There was no relationship between whether the patients had undergone surgery to remove tumors (p > 0.05), chemotherapy (p > 0.05), or radiotherapy (p > 0.05) according to the PG-SGA and NTRS.

CONCLUSION

Malnutrition is common in cancer patients. These patients may be malnourished even if their BMI is within normal limits. Malnutrition can be detected and evaluated in the ED using instruments such as the PG-SGA. We suggest that evaluation for malnutrition should be a standard component of patient care in the ED.