ArticleCancer medicine2026
The Clinical Benefits of Nutritional Supplementation Across the Chemotherapy Journey in Cancer Patients: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to explore the clinical benefits of receiving nutritional supplementation (NS) throughout the whole course of chemotherapy.
methodsThis multicenter prospective cohort study totally included 251 cancer patients requiring nutritional support and scheduled for chemotherapy. Primary outcomes included energy intake (EI), protein intake (PI), body mass index (BMI), NRS 2002 and PG-SGA scores. Short-term efficacy was the secondary outcome.
resultsAmong the study participants, 168 received NS, whereas 83 opted for dietary advice (DA) alone. In the NS group, EI and PI demonstrated a gradual upward trend across the six cycles of chemotherapy, with no significant changes in the DA group. The BMI remained stable in both groups. The proportion of patients with or at risk of malnutrition showed a declining trend in the NS group but an increasing trend in the DA group. The generalized estimating equation results indicated that NS significantly improved PI (coefficient = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.27, p < 0.001), NRS 2002 (coefficient = -0.13, 95% CI: -0.23 to -0.03, p = 0.005), and PG-SGA (coefficient = -0.18, 95% CI: -0.28 to -0.08, p < 0.001). The improvements in PI, NRS 2002, and PG-SGA scores occurred from cycle 1, cycle 3, and cycle 2, respectively. Multivariate logistic analysis confirmed NS as a favorable factor associated with higher disease control rate (OR = 4.65, 95% CI: [1.88, 12.01], p = 0.001).
conclusionsThe incorporation of NS yielded several clinical benefits beyond adequate EI and stable weight. It contributes to higher protein intake and good nutritional status in patients with cancer throughout the whole course of chemotherapy, ultimately improving treatment efficacy.
trial registrationPatient-Reported Outcome Management Including Surveillance and Intervention in Nutritional Group (PROMISING) Study (registration number: ChiCTR2100047535).
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.