Identifying nutritional deficits and implementing appropriate interventions in patients requiring vascular surgery is challenging due to the paucity of appropriate screening and assessment tools in this group. This retrospective study aimed to determine the validity of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) in identifying protein–energy malnutrition (PEM) in inpatients admitted to a vascular surgery unit, using the PG-SGA as the comparator. Diagnostic accuracy and consistency were determined between the GLIM and the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) global rating. The GLIM determination was made retrospectively using the relevant parameters collected at baseline in the original study. Two hundred and twenty-four (70·1 % male) participants were included. The prevalence of PEM was 28·6 % on GLIM and 17 % via the PG-SGA. Compared with the PG-SGA, the GLIM achieved sensitivity of 73·7 % and specificity of 80·6 %; however positive predictive value was 43·7 % indicating that the GLIM over-diagnosed malnutrition compared with the PG-SGA. Kappa reached 0·427 indicating moderate diagnostic consistency. Due to the absence of an ideal instrument and the complexity of malnutrition often seen in this group which extends beyond PEM to significant micronutrient deficiencies, further work is required to determine the most appropriate instrument in this patient group, and how micronutrient status can also be included in the overall assessment given the critical role of micronutrients in this group.

The prevalence of malnutrition is high among oncology patients in Northern China. Malnutrition is related to the longer hospital stay, and it can be used to predict the prognostic outcome of patients. This work focused on investigating the relationship of nutritional condition with the length of hospital stay (LOS) in Northern Chinese patients with lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). The Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA), Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) score, recent weight loss and BMI were assessed in a probabilistic sample of 389 LUAD patients without epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. This study collected the demographic and clinical features of patients in a prospective manner. Then, we examined the association of nutritional status with LOS among the population developing LUAD. According to the PG-SGA, 63 (16·3 %), 174 (44·7 %) and 78 (20·1 %) patients were at risk for undernutrition, moderate undernutrition and severe undernutrition, respectively. Nutritional risk was found in 141 (36·2 %) patients based on the NRS 2002. The average LOS for tumour patients in Northern China was 12·5 d. At admission, a risk of undernutrition or undernutrition according to the PG-SGA (P < 0·001), NRS 2002 (P < 0·001) and latest weight loss (P < 0·001) predicted the longer LOS. LOS was related to nutritional status and hospitalisation expenses (P < 0·001). LUAD patients who stayed in the ICU had a poorer nutritional status and a longer LOS (P < 0·001). In Northern Chinese patients with LUAD, a risk for undernutrition evaluated by the PG-SGA, the NRS 2002 and recent weight loss, but not BMI, could predict a longer LOS.

Vascular surgery patients are nutritionally vulnerable. Various malnutrition screening and assessment tools are available; however, none has been developed or validated in vascular patients. The present study aimed to: (1) investigate the validity of four commonly administered malnutrition screening tools (Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST), Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), Nutrition Risk Screen-2002 (NRS-2002) and the Mini-Nutritional Assessment – Short Form (MNA-SF) and an assessment tool (the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA)) compared against a comprehensive dietitian’s assessment and (2) evaluate the ability of the instruments to predict outcomes. Vascular inpatients were screened using the four malnutrition screening tools and assessed using the PG-SGA. Each was assessed by a dietitian incorporating nutritional biochemistry, anthropometry and changes in dietary intake. Diagnostic accuracy, consistency and predictive ability were determined. A total of 322 (69·3 % male) patients participated, with 75 % having at least one parameter indicating nutritional deficits. No instrument achieved the a priori levels for sensitivity (14·9–52·5 %). Neither tool predicted EuroQoL 5-dimension 5-level score. All tools except the MNA-SF were associated with length of stay (LOS); however, the direction varied with increased risk of malnutrition on the MUST and NRS-2002 being associated with shorter LOS (P=0·029 and 0·045) and the reverse with the MST and PG-SGA (P=0·005 and <0·001). The NRS-2002 was associated with increased risk of complications (P=0·039). The MST, NRS-2002 and PG-SGA were predictive of discharge to an institution (P=0·004, 0·005 and 0·003). The tools studied were unable to identify the high prevalence of undernutrition; hence, vascular disease-specific screening and/or assessment tools are warranted.

Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is one of the most commonly reported disease- and treatment-related side effects that impede quality of life. This systematic review and meta-analysis describes the effects of nutrition therapy on CRF and quality of life in people with cancer and cancer survivors. Studies were identified from four electronic databases until September 2017. Eligibility criteria included randomised trials in cancer patients and survivors; any structured dietary intervention describing quantities, proportions, varieties and frequencies of food groups or energy and macronutrient consumption targets; and measures of CRF and quality of life. Standardised mean differences (SMD) were pooled using random-effects models. The American Dietetic Association’s Evidence Analysis Library Quality Checklist for Primary Research was used to evaluate the methodological quality and risk of bias. A total of sixteen papers, of fifteen interventions, were included, comprising 1290 participants. Nutrition therapy offered no definitive effect on CRF (SMD 0·18 (95 % CI –0·02, 0·39)) or quality of life (SMD 0·07 (95 % CI –0·10, 0·24)). Preliminary evidence indicates plant-based dietary pattern nutrition therapy may benefit CRF (SMD 0·62 (95 % CI 0·10, 1·15)). Interventions using the patient-generated subjective global assessment tool and prescribing hypermetabolic energy and protein requirements may improve quality of life. However, the heterogeneity seen in study design, nutrition therapies, quality-of-life measures and cancer types impede definitive dietary recommendations to improve quality of life for cancer patients. There is insufficient evidence to determine the optimal nutrition care plan to improve CRF and/or quality of life in cancer patients and survivors.

The scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) is considered to be the most appropriate tool for detecting malnutrition in cancer patients. In particular, malignant tumours derived from the gastrointestinal tract may impair nutrient intake and absorption and cause malnutrition. We carried out a cross-sectional study to assess the nutritional status and related factors of patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Nutritional status was determined using the scored PG-SGA in patients (n 498) with advanced gastrointestinal cancer admitted to the Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology Unit at Beijing Cancer Hospital between 1 August 2012 and 28 February 2013. The possible related factors including age, sex, hospitalisation frequency and pathology were explored. We found that 98 % of the patients required nutrition intervention and 54 % of the patients required improved nutrition-related symptom management and/or urgent nutritional support (PG-SGA score ≥ 9). Factors related to malnutrition were age (r 0·103, P< 0·01), hospitalisation frequency (r − 0·196, P< 0·01) and sex (the prevalence of malnutrition was higher in men than in women (9·88 v. 8·54, P< 0·01)). Patients with rectal cancer had a lower risk of malnutrition than patients with other types of gastrointestinal cancer (F= 35·895, P< 0·01). More attention should be paid to the nutritional status of gastrointestinal patients, especially those at a higher risk of malnutrition, such as elderly patients, those hospitalised for the first time, male patients and those with other types of gastrointestinal cancer except rectal cancer. The nutritional status of these patients should be evaluated and they should be given proper nutrition education and nutritional support in a timely manner.

In the present study, we aimed to validate the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) for routine nutritional screening in the radiation oncology setting, thus enabling timely and adequate referrals of patients at risk for individualised or advanced intervention. Towards this objective, we conducted a prospective cross-sectional study in 450 non-selected cancer patients (18–95 years) referred for radiotherapy. The following were the nutritional parameters: BMI (categorised by WHO's age/sex criteria), weight loss >5 % in the previous 3–6 months, Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA – validated/specific for oncology) and nutritional risk by MUST. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and concordance were calculated to validate MUST v. PG-SGA and compare single parameters v. PG-SGA/MUST. BMI v. PG-SGA showed a negligible capacity to detect undernutrition: 0·27 sensitivity, 0·23 specificity, 0·35 positive predictive value and 0·31 negative predictive value. Conversely, percentage weight loss v. PG-SGA was highly effective: 0·76 sensitivity, 0·85 specificity, 0·79 positive predictive value and 0·85 negative predictive value. MUST v. PG-SGA successfully detected patients at risk: 0·80 sensitivity, 0·89 specificity, 0·87 positive predictive value and 1·0 negative predictive value; percentage weight loss v. MUST proved able to identify patients likely to be at risk: 0·85 sensitivity, 0·91 specificity, 0·90 positive predictive value and 1·0 negative predictive value. This is the first study in the radiation oncology setting to validate MUST: a simple and quick method applicable by any health professional, with a high validity for early screening, ideally to antedate a comprehensive nutritional assessment and guide for intervention. In this study, percentage weight loss in the previous 3–6 months does seem valid to predict nutritional risk, and may be the minimum in a busy routine.