NUTRITIONAL ASSESMENT IN ONCOLOGY OUTPATIENTS: A REVIEW OF SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT TOOLS

Lý Mỹ 1 , , Trần Phương 1
1 Trường Đại Học Trà Vinh image/svg+xml
* Tác giả liên hệ:

Thông tin bài viết

Thống kê
Lượt tải: 3 Lượt xem: 5
Xuất bản
27-02-2026
Chuyên mục
Nghiên cứu gốc

Tải bài viết

Cách trích dẫn

1.
Mỹ L, Phương T. NUTRITIONAL ASSESMENT IN ONCOLOGY OUTPATIENTS: A REVIEW OF SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT TOOLS. JHA [Internet]. Vietnam; 2026 tháng 2 27 [cited 2026 tháng 2 28];2(7):45–50. https://tcsuckhoelaohoa.vn/bvtn/article/view/151 doi: 10.63947/bvtn.v2i7.6
Loading...
Đang tải trích dẫn...

Tóm tắt

Malnutrition and the associated phenotype of sarcopenia significantly compromise treatment tolerance, increase toxicity risk, and worsen overall survival in cancer patients. Given that the majority of oncological care occurs in the ambulatory setting, systematic nutritional assessment is a critical, mandated component of supportive care. This review synthesizes current evidence to evaluate the optimal screening and assessment tools suitable for routine use in outpatient oncology practice. A comprehensive narrative review was conducted, focusing on recent clinical guidelines and peer-reviewed literature concerning the validation and clinical utility of nutritional assessment instruments. Tools were analyzed across two tiers: Tier 1 (Screening) for feasibility and sensitivity; and Tier 2 (Comprehensive Assessment) for diagnostic accuracy regarding muscle loss and inflammation. The Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) and Mini Nutritional Assessment Short Form (MNA-SF) emerged as the most practical and sensitive Tier 1 tools for general and geriatric oncology, respectively. For Tier 2, the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) remains the gold standard. Crucially, the integration of objective measures—specifically Handgrip Strength and AI-assisted analysis of CT-derived Skeletal Muscle Index (SMI)—is essential for accurately diagnosing sarcopenia. Furthermore, the C-Reactive Protein/Albumin Ratio (CAR) is a powerful biomarker confirming the inflammatory drive of cachexia. Effective nutritional assessment mandates a structured, tiered approach. The reliance on advanced tools for objective body composition analysis is paramount for personalized care. Future efforts must focus on digitalizing this pathway, utilizing AI for automated sarcopenia detection, and ensuring robust resource allocation to oncology dietitians.

Từ khóa

Nutritional Assessment Oncology Outpatient Cancer Cachexia Sarcopenia

Tài liệu tham khảo

  1. Arends J, et al. ESPEN guidelines on nutrition in cancer patients (Updated 2022). Clin Nutr. 2022;41(12):3207–37.
  2. Haas K, et al. Nutritional status and appetite in cancer patients undergoing active treatment: an outpatient study. Support Care Cancer. 2021;29(9):5027–34.
  3. Santini G, et al. Nutritional status as predictor of unplanned hospitalization in ambulatory cancer patients. Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2023;54:212-219.
  4. Daly B, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) consensus guidelines on nutrition, physical activity, and energy balance during cancer treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(32):3898–908.
  5. Corti V, et al. Sarcopenia is associated with immune-related adverse events and reduced overall survival in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2024;193:104192.
  6. Neeley C, et al. Body composition and altered pharmacokinetics of chemotherapy: implications for dose optimization. Am J Clin Nutr. 2021;113(6):1480–91.
  7. Martin L, et al. Sarcopenia and its impact on outcomes in cancer patients. Eur J Cancer. 2022;162:1-12.
  8. Fearon KCH, et al. Definition and classification of cancer cachexia: an international consensus. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(5):489–95.
  9. Risch L, et al. Sarcopenic obesity in cancer: an updated definition and clinical implications. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2020;74(12):1695–1704.
  10. Smet J, et al. Validation of the Malnutrition Screening Tool in various settings: a systematic review. Nutrients. 2022;14(15):3063.
  11. Rinninella E, et al. Imaging-based assessment of muscle mass and sarcopenia: a critical review of available techniques. Nutrition. 2020;77:110793.
  12. Cederholm T, et al. ESPEN guidelines on nutrition in clinical practice: the importance of the disease severity score. Clin Nutr. 2020;39(12):3570-80.
  13. Bauer J, et al. Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA): a reliable and valid tool for assessing nutritional status in cancer patients. Br J Cancer. 2002;87(1):16-24.
  14. Delibasic J, et al. PG-SGA as a predictor of chemotherapy toxicity, hospital stay, and survival in patients with colorectal cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2021;29(10):5805–12.
  15. Rinninella E, et al. Imaging-based assessment of muscle mass and sarcopenia: a critical review of available techniques. Nutrition. 2020;77:110793.
  16. Baur J, et al. Automated deep learning-based skeletal muscle quantification on CT scans: Current status and future perspectives in oncology. Clin Nutr. 2023;42(4):755–63.
  17. Norman K, et al. Handgrip strength: outcome predictor and a tool for monitoring nutritional status. Clin Nutr. 2011;30(1):1–8.
  18. Hata T, et al. Prognostic significance of the C-reactive protein to albumin ratio in patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2021;12(1):114–22.

Giấy phép

© 2026 Tác giả. Xuất bản bởi Tạp chí Sức khỏe và Lão hóa.