P317 - EFFICACY OF NUTRISCORE AND MST IN IDENTIFYING NUTRITIONAL RISK, USING PG-SGA AND GLIM CRITERIA AS THE STANDARD IN OUTPATIENTS WITH CANCER

P317

EFFICACY OF NUTRISCORE AND MST IN IDENTIFYING NUTRITIONAL RISK, USING PG-SGA AND GLIM CRITERIA AS THE STANDARD IN OUTPATIENTS WITH CANCER

E. Madureira^1,*, M. I. Ascenção², B. M. Oliveira^2,3

¹Nutrition, ULS São João, ²FCNAUP, ³Artificial Intelligence and Decision Support Laboratory, INESC TEC, Porto, Portugal

Rationale: Cancer patients are likely to have malnutrition. The aim of this study is to compare Nutriscore and Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) in identifying nutritional risk, using Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA^c) and Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria as a reference.

Methods: A cross-sectional observational study, approved by the Ethics Committee of Local Health Unit of São João, Portugal, was conducted in adults with a diagnosis of cancer in pre-treatment (except surgery). Sociodemographic data, lifestyle data (smoking and drinking habits and physical exercise) and clinical data (diagnosis, stage and treatment) were collected and the four tools were applied.

Results: Since November 2024, 158 patients have been included. The cancer site grouping ranked highest in nutritional risk or malnutrition were esophagus and stomach (84.2%), hepato-bilio-pancreatic (69.2%) and head and neck (50.0%). MST classified 25.3% and Nutriscore 7.0% of the sample as having nutritional risk. PG-SGA^c and GLIM criteria were similar in the classification of malnutrition (39.2% vs 44.9%). The sensitivity and specificity of Nutriscore with PG-SGA^c as standard were, respectively, 17.7% and 100.0% and with GLIM criteria as standard were, respectively, 15.5% and 100.0%. The sensitivity and specificity of MST with PG-SGA^c as standard were, respectively, 62.9% and 99.0% and with GLIM criteria as standard were, respectively, 52.1% and 96.6%. Malnutrition and risk of malnutrition, according to the four tools, was not related with previous surgery (Nutriscore p=0.343; MST p=0.709; PG-SGA^c p=1.000; GLIM p=0.515).    

Conclusion: MST has a better performance than Nutriscore in identifying nutritional risk in outpatients with cancer before treatment.

Disclosure of Interest: None declared