Value of the modified Patient‐Generated Subjective Global Assessment in indicating the need for nutrition intervention and predicting overall survival in patients with malignant tumors in at least two organs

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundAlthough the Patient‐Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG‐SGA) is a reference standard used to assess a patient's nutrition status, it is cumbersome to administer. The aim of the present study was to estimate the value of a simpler and easier‐to‐use modified PG‐SGA (mPG‐SGA) to evaluate the nutrition status and need for intervention in patients with malignant tumors present in at least two organs.MethodsA total of 591 patients (343 male and 248 female) were included from the INSCOC study. A Pearson correlation analysis was conducted to assess the correlation between the mPG‐SGA and nutrition‐related factors, with the optimal cut‐off defined by a receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). The consistency between the mPG‐SGA and PG‐SGA was compared in a concordance analysis. A survival analysis was used to determine the effects of nutritional intervention among different nutrition status groups. Univariable and multivariable Cox analyses were applied to evaluate the association of the mPG‐SGA with the all‐cause mortality.ResultsThe mPG‐SGA showed a negative association with nutrition‐related factors. Individuals with an mPG‐SGA ≥ 5 (rounded from 4.5) were considered to need nutritional intervention. Among the malnourished patients (mPG‐SGA ≥ 5), the overall survival (OS) of those who received nutrition intervention was significantly higher than that of patients who did not. However, the OS was not significantly different in the better‐nourished patients (mPG‐SGA < 5).ConclusionOur findings support that the mPG‐SGA is a feasible tool that can be used to guide nutritional interventions and predict the survival of patients with malignant tumors affecting at least two organs.