Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41994017›Full record

ArticleESMO gastrointestinal oncology2026

Impact of nutritional risk screening on outcomes of first-line treatment in metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma: a secondary analysis of the AIO-MATEO trial.

R Stelmach, S Lorenzen, T J Ettrich, F R Longo, B Chibaudel, R Greil, M Perwög, J Larcher-Steiner, D Jäger, F Lordick and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in ESMO gastrointestinal oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

12 authors.

R StelmachDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
S LorenzenClinic and Policlinic for Internal Medicine III, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany.
T J EttrichDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
F R LongoRamon y Cajal University Hospital, IRYCIS, CIBERONC, Madrid, Spain.
B ChibaudelDepartment of Medical Oncology, Franco-British Hospital, Fondation Cognacq-Jay, Levallois-Perret, France.
R GreilIIIrd Medical Department, Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
M PerwögP95 Clinical and Epidemiology Services, Innsbruck, Austria.
J Larcher-SteinerP95 Clinical and Epidemiology Services, Innsbruck, Austria.
D JägerDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
F LordickDepartment of Medicine (Oncology, Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Pulmonology) and University Cancer Center Leipzig, University of Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany.
G StockerDepartment of Medicine (Oncology, Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Pulmonology) and University Cancer Center Leipzig, University of Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany.
G M HaagDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Malnutrition is common in patients with metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (EGA). However, the prognostic impact of nutritional risk screening (NRS) in advanced EGA remains underexplored. This preplanned analysis of the phase II AIO-MATEO trial evaluated the impact of NRS on clinical outcomes for patients with advanced EGA. Patients and methods: Patients enrolled in the MATEO trial (exploring S-1 maintenance therapy) with an available baseline NRS before induction chemotherapy were included. Patients were stratified by their baseline NRS score (<3 versus ≥3). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods. Results: Of the 136 patients, 86 had an NRS score <3 and 50 had an NRS score ≥3 at baseline. Baseline median European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ C30) global health score was lower for the NRS ≥3 group (37.5 versus 58.3). Nutritional interventions were more frequent in the NRS ≥3 group (45.8% versus 10.6%; Conclusions: Baseline NRS is a significant predictor of outcome in patients with metastatic EGA. Our findings underscore the importance of routinely assessing the nutritional status of patients with metastatic EGA and intervening early.

Indexed as

chemotherapymalnutritionmetastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinomanutritional interventionnutritional risk screening

Identifiers

PMID41994017
PMCPMC13080901

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.