Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35210853›Full record

ReviewCancer management and research2022

Current Screening Methods for the Risk or Presence of Malnutrition in Cancer Patients.

Alessio Molfino, Giovanni Imbimbo, Alessandro Laviano

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer management and research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alessio MolfinoDepartment of Translational and Precision Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Giovanni ImbimboDepartment of Translational and Precision Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Alessandro LavianoDepartment of Translational and Precision Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9809-3553
Sapienza University of Rome · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Malnutrition is highly common among cancer patients and is associated with a poor quality of life, increased treatment toxicities and decreased survival. The screening of malnutrition should be performed in an early stage of cancer disease and should be rapid, not expensive and highly sensitive to identify the risk of developing malnutrition. Importantly, international clinical guidelines suggest to perform screening for malnutrition in all cancer patients and if the risk is present, they recommend to perform a full nutritional assessment. During the screening phase, different nutritional parameters are considered including the loss of appetite, low food intake, body weight loss and burden of the disease. These items are present in several screening tools, such as the Nutrition Risk Screening (NRS)-2002, the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) which represent the most widely used tools to screen for an altered nutritional status in cancer patients. Recently, the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) developed an assessment tool for the diagnosis of malnutrition taking into account the presence of i) involuntary body weight loss, ii) body mass index, iii) low muscle mass, iv) low food intake and disease burden/inflammation; in particular, body weight loss, decreased body mass index (BMI), and low muscle mass are considered as phenotypic criteria, whereas reduced food intake, disease burden and inflammation are defined as etiologic criteria. To perform the diagnosis of malnutrition, GLIM consensus considered the presence of at least one phenotypic and one etiologic criterion. The above-mentioned screening tools were validated in different clinical settings and suggesting the use of one tool vs another is challenging considering, among others, different factors including the type and stage of cancer and the setting (i.e., inpatient or outpatient care). Recent data obtained among large cohorts of cancer patients indicate that personalized nutritional therapy reduced mortality risk and ameliorated quality of life and functionality among cancer patients with high nutritional risk, supporting the urgent need for implementing screening and diagnosis of malnutrition in this context.

Indexed as

anorexiaassessmentbody weight losscachexiacancermalnutritionscreening

Identifiers

PMID35210853
PMCPMC8857947
OpenAlexW4213294085

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.