• Clinical Nutrition Research
• /
• v.11 no.3
• /
• pp.183-193
• /
• 2022

We investigated the predictors of survival in patients with advanced BTC according to their baseline nutritional status estimated by the Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS)-2002. From September 2006 to July 2017, we reviewed the data of 601 inpatients with BTC. Data on demographic and clinical parameters was collected from electronic medical records, and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and the stepwise Cox regression analysis. Patients with an NRS-2002 score of ≤ 2, 3, and ≥ 4 were respectively classified as "no risk," "moderate risk," "high risk." Following initial NRS-2002 score, 333 patients (55%) were classified as "no-risk," 109 patients (18%) as "moderate-risk," and 159 patients (27%) as "high-risk." Survival analysis demonstrated significant differences in the median OS: "no-risk": 12.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.5-13.7); "moderate-risk": 6.1 months (95% CI, 4.3-8.0); and "high-risk": 3.9 months (95% CI, 3.2-4.6) (p < 0.001). NRS-2002 score was an independent factor for OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.616 for "moderate-risk", 95% CI, 1.288-2.027, p < 0.001; HR, 2.121 for "high-risk", 95% CI, 1.722-2.612, p < 0.001), along with liver metastasis, peritoneal seeding, white blood cell count, platelet count, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, cholesterol, carcinoembryonic antigen, and carbohydrate antigen 19-9. In conclusion, baseline NRS-2002 is an appropriate method for discriminating those who are already malnourished and who have poor prognosis in advanced BTC patient. Significance of these results merit further validation to be integrated in the routine practice to improve quality of care in BTC patients.

• Nutrition Research and Practice
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.20-24
• /
• 2020

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Malnutrition has multiple impacts on surgical success, postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, and costs, particularly for cancer patients. There are various nutrition risk screening tools available for clinical use. Herein, we aim to determine the most appropriate nutritional risk screening system for esophageal cancer (EC) patients in China. SUBJECTS/METHODS: In total, 138 EC patients were enrolled in this study and evaluated by experienced nurses using three different nutritional screening tools, the Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 tool (NRS2002), the Patient-generated Subjective Globe Assessment (PG-SGA), and the Nutrition Risk Index (NRI).We compared sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and Youden index generated by each of the three screening tools. Finally, cut-off points for all three tools were re-defined to optimize and validate the best nutritional risk screening tool for assessing EC patients. RESULTS: Our data suggested that all three screening tools were 100% sensitive for EC patients, while the specificities were 44.4%, 2.96%, and 59.26% for NRS 2002, PG-SGA, and NRI, respectively. NRI had a higher positive likelihood ratio as well as a higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve compared to those of NRS 2002 and PG-SGA; although, all three tools had null negative likelihood ratios. After adjusting the cut-off points, the specificity and accuracy for all tools were significantly improved, however, the NRI remained the most appropriate nutritional risk screening system for EC patients. CONCLUSIONS: The NRI is the most suitable (highest sensitivity and accuracy) nutritional risk screening tool for EC patients. The performance of the NRI can be significantly improved if the cut-off point is modified according to the results obtained using MedCalc software.

• Journal of Nutrition and Health
• /
• v.43 no.2
• /
• pp.189-196
• /
• 2010

Malnutrition has been associated with higher hospital costs, mortality, rates of complications and longer length of hospital stay. Several nutritional screening tools have been developed to identify patients with malnutrition risk. However, many of those require much time and labor to administer and may not be applicable to a Korean population. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop nutritional screening tool for Korean inpatients. Then we compare nutritional screening tools that developed and previously described. Seven hundred sixty-four patients at hospital admission were screened nutritional status and classified as well nourished, malnutrition stage 1 or stage 2 by the KNNRS (Kyunghee Neo Nutrition Risk Screening), PG-SGA (Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment) and NRS-2002 (Nutritional Risk Screening-2002). The KNNRS, PG-SGA and NRS-2002 respectively classified 28.7%, 51.3%, 48.5% of patients as malnourished status. Compared to the PG-SGA, the KNNRS had sensitivity 60.7% (95% CI 54.2-67.0) and specificity 81.2% (95% CI 75.3-85.2). Agreement was fair between KNNRS and PG-SGA (k = 0.34). Compared to the NRS-2002, the KNNRS had sensitivity 57.8% (95% CI 53.4-60.9) and specificity 64.4% (95% CI 60.2-69.8). Agreement was poor between KNNRS and NRS-2002 (k = 0.18). These result should include that the KNNRS and PGSGA have clinical relevance and fair concordance. However the rate of malnourished patients by KNNRS were less than by PG-SGA. For more effectivity of nutritional screening and management, the criteria of KNNRS would be better revised.

• Journal of Nutrition and Health
• /
• v.42 no.2
• /
• pp.119-127
• /
• 2009

Malnutrition of hospitalized patients can adversely affect clinical outcomes and cost. Several nutritional screening tools have been developed to identify patients with malnutrition risk. However, many of those possess practical pitfalls of requiring much time and labor to administer and may not be highly applicable to a Korean population. This study sought to develop and evaluate a Nutrition Risk Screening Tool (NRST) which is simple and quick to administer and widely applicable to Korean hospitalized patients with various diseases. The study was also designed to generate a screening tool predictable of various clinical outcomes and to validate it against the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002). Electronic medical records of 424 patients hospitalized at a general hospital in Seoul during a 14-month period were abstracted for anthropometric, medical, biochemical, and clinical outcome variables. The study employed a 4-step process consisting of selecting NRST components, searching a scoring scheme, validating against a reference tool, and confirming clinical outcome predictability. NRST components were selected by stepwise multiple regression analysis of each clinical outcome (i.e., hospitalization period, complication, disease progress, and death) on several readily available patient characteristics. Age and serum levels of albumin, hematocrit (Hct), and total lymphocyte count (TLC) remained in the last model for any of 4 dependent variables were decided as NRST components. Odds ratios of malnutrition risk based on NRS 2002 according to levels of the selected components were utilized to frame a scoring scheme of NRST. A NRST score higher than 3.5 was set as a cut-off score for malnutrition risk based on sensitivity and specificity levels against NRS 2002. Lastly differences in clinical outcomes by patients' NRST results were examined. The results showed that the NRST can significantly predict the in-hospital clinical outcomes. It is concluded that the NRST can be useful to simply and quickly screen patients at high-nutritional risk in relation to prospective clinical outcomes.

• Nutrition Research and Practice
• /
• v.9 no.6
• /
• pp.637-643
• /
• 2015

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Malnutrition in the elderly is a serious problem, prevalent in both hospitals and care homes. Due to the absence of a gold standard for malnutrition, herein we evaluate the efficacy of five nutritional screening tools developed or used for the elderly. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Elected medical records of 141 elderly patients (86 men and 55 women, aged $73.5{\pm}5.2years$) hospitalized at a geriatric care hospital were analyzed. Nutritional screening was performed using the following tools: Mini Nutrition Assessment (MNA), Mini Nutrition Assessment-Short Form (MNA-SF), Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI), Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002). A combined index for malnutrition was also calculated as a reference tool. Each patient evaluated as malnourished to any degree or at risk of malnutrition according to at least four out of five of the aforementioned tools was categorized as malnourished in the combined index classification. RESULTS: According to the combined index, 44.0% of the patients were at risk of malnutrition to some degree. While the nutritional risk and/or malnutrition varied greatly depending on the tool applied, ranging from 36.2% (MUST) to 72.3% (MNA-SF). MUST showed good validity (sensitivity 80.6%, specificity 98.7%) and almost perfect agreement (k = 0.81) with the combined index. In contrast, MNA-SF showed poor validity (sensitivity 100%, specificity 49.4%) and only moderate agreement (k = 0.46) with the combined index. CONCLUSIONS: MNA-SF was found to overestimate the nutritional risk in the elderly. MUST appeared to be the most valid and useful screening tool to predict malnutrition in the elderly at a geriatric care hospital.

• Journal of Nutrition and Health
• /
• v.47 no.2
• /
• pp.124-133
• /
• 2014

Purpose: The current study was designed for development of a simplified malnutrition screening tool (SMST) for hospitalized patients using readily available laboratory and patient information and for evaluation of its reliability compared to well-established tools, such as PGSGA and NRS-2002. Methods: Anthropometric and biochemical measurements, as well as a few subjective assessments, of 903 patients who were preclassified by their nutritional status according to PGSGA were analyzed. Among them, a combination of factors, including age, BMI, albumin, cholesterol, total protein, hematocrit, and changes in body weight and food intake, were statistically selected as variables for SMST. Results: According to SMST, 620 patients (68.7%) were classified as the normal group and 283 patients (31.3%) were classified as the malnutrition group. Significant differences in age, albumin, TLC, BMI, hemoglobin, hematocrit, total protein, cholesterol, and length of stay were observed between the two groups. For inter-methods reliability, the screening results by SMST were compared with those by PGSGA and NRS-2002. The comparison with PGSGA and NRS-2002 showed 'Substantial agreement' (sensitivity 94.4%, specificity 88.4%, ${\kappa}$ = 0.747) and 'Moderate agreement' (sensitivity 96.1%, specificity 79.5%, ${\kappa}$ = 0.505), respectively, indicating that SMST held high inter-methods reliability. Conclusion: In conclusion, SMST, based on readily available laboratory and patient information and simple subjective assessments on changes in food intake and body weight, may be a useful alternative tool with a simple but reliable risk index, especially in resource-limited domestic hospitals.

• Nutrition Research and Practice
• /
• v.16 no.5
• /
• pp.604-615
• /
• 2022

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate cancer-specific survival (CSS) and associated risk factors in elderly gastric cancer (EGC) patients. SUBJECTS/METHODS: EGC patients (≥ 70 yrs) who underwent curative gastrectomy between January 2013 and December 2017 at our hospital were included. Clinicopathologic characteristics and survival data were collected. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to extract the best cutoff point for body mass index (BMI). A Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the risk factors for CSS. RESULTS: In total, 290 EGC patients were included, with a median age of 74.7 yrs. The median follow-up time was 31 (1-77) mon. The postoperative 1-yr, 3-yr and 5-yr CSS rates were 93.7%, 75.9% and 65.1%, respectively. Univariate analysis revealed risk factors for CSS, including age (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.15), intensive care unit (ICU) admission (HR = 1.73; 95% CI, 1.08-2.79), nutritional risk screening (NRS 2002) score ≥ 5 (HR = 2.33; 95% CI, 1.49-3.75), and preoperative prognostic nutrition index score < 45 (HR = 2.06; 95% CI, 1.27-3.33). The ROC curve showed that the best BMI cutoff value was 20.6 kg/m². Multivariate analysis indicated that a BMI ≤ 20.6 kg/m² (HR = 2.30; 95% CI, 1.36-3.87), ICU admission (HR = 1.97; 95% CI, 1.17-3.30) and TNM stage (stage II: HR = 5.56; 95% CI, 1.59-19.43; stage III: HR = 16.20; 95% CI, 4.99-52.59) were significantly associated with CSS. CONCLUSIONS: Low BMI (≤ 20.6 kg/m²), ICU admission and advanced pathological TNM stages (II and III) are independent risk factors for CSS in EGC patients after curative gastrectomy. Nutrition support, better perioperative management and early diagnosis would be helpful for better survival.