ArticleCureus2025
Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment and Phase Angle as Predictors of Survival in Cancer Patients.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMalnutrition is a common and serious complication among cancer patients that negatively affects treatment response, quality of life, and overall survival. Tools such as the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA©) and phase angle (PA), which is derived from bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), have shown promise in identifying nutritional risk. Their effectiveness as mortality predictors requires further validation. Objective: Investigate the association between different nutritional assessment approaches, including the PG-SGA, body mass index (BMI), fat-free mass index (FFMI), and phase angle, and overall survival in patients undergoing systemic cancer treatment.
methodsA prospective study was conducted with 111 adult patients treated at a tertiary university hospital. Nutritional assessments were performed using the PG-SGA and BIA, and clinical and oncological data were collected. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves, and mortality-associated variables were identified using Cox proportional hazards regression models.
resultsDuring the follow-up period, 51.4% of patients died. PG-SGA classification was strongly associated with mortality; severely malnourished patients had a 4.68-fold higher risk of death than well-nourished patients (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.68; p < 0.001), even after adjusting for tumor type. FFMI also emerged as a relevant marker, with higher mortality observed in patients with low lean body mass. Phase angle showed a significant association with survival in univariate analysis, though this association lost significance after adjusting for clinical stage.
conclusionThese findings suggest that a comprehensive nutritional assessment that integrates clinical and bioelectrical parameters may provide valuable information for risk stratification in oncology. The PG-SGA classification stood out as an independent predictor of mortality, and phase angle demonstrated potential as a complementary marker. The results underscore the importance of early nutritional screening as an essential component of multidisciplinary cancer care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.