School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.
School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia; Nutrition and Speech Pathology Department, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Clin Nutr. 2023 Mar;42(3):255-268. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2023.01.012. Epub 2023 Jan 13.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The predictive validity of the GLIM criteria for survival, length of hospital stay (LOHS) and post-operative complications among people with cancer have not been systematically reviewed. This systematic review aims to determine whether GLIM malnutrition is predictive of these outcomes, and whether the predictive validity is affected by how phenotypic and etiologic criteria are assessed.
Cohort studies published after 2018 were systematically reviewed according to PRISMA guidelines from Embase, Medline Complete and CINAHL Complete. Risk of bias and methodologic quality were assessed using the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics' Quality Criteria Checklist tool for Primary research.
In total, 21 studies were included, including 28,726 participants. All studies investigated survival, where 18 reported GLIM malnutrition is associated with decreased survival. LOHS was investigated in six studies, with all finding an association between GLIM malnutrition and longer LOHS. Post-operative complications were assessed in seven studies, of which five reported GLIM malnutrition was predictive of increased post-operative complications. Methods to assess the GLIM phenotypic and etiologic criteria varied, with consistent predictive ability for survival regardless of method of assessing reduced muscle mass. However, predictive ability was more variable across different measures of inflammation and reduced intake.
GLIM malnutrition was consistently predictive of worse clinical outcomes. Different measures of reduced muscle mass did not affect the predictive ability of GLIM for survival. However, variation in assessment of the etiologic criteria resulted in varying predictive ability of the GLIM diagnosis for survival.
GLIM 标准对癌症患者生存、住院时间(LOHS)和术后并发症的预测效度尚未得到系统评价。本系统评价旨在确定 GLIM 营养不良是否能预测这些结局,以及表型和病因标准的评估方式是否会影响预测效度。
根据 Embase、Medline Complete 和 CINAHL Complete 中的 PRISMA 指南,系统地检索了 2018 年后发表的队列研究。使用《营养与饮食学会杂志》初级研究质量标准检查表工具评估了偏倚风险和方法学质量。
共纳入 21 项研究,包括 28726 名参与者。所有研究均调查了生存情况,其中 18 项研究表明 GLIM 营养不良与生存率降低有关。有 6 项研究调查了 LOHS,均发现 GLIM 营养不良与 LOHS 延长有关。有 7 项研究评估了术后并发症,其中 5 项研究表明 GLIM 营养不良与术后并发症增加有关。评估 GLIM 表型和病因标准的方法多种多样,尽管评估肌肉减少的方法不同,但 GLIM 对生存的预测能力保持一致。然而,不同的炎症和摄入减少的衡量标准的预测能力存在差异。
GLIM 营养不良与较差的临床结局一致相关。减少肌肉量的不同衡量标准并未影响 GLIM 对生存的预测能力。然而,病因标准的评估方式存在差异,导致 GLIM 诊断对生存的预测能力存在差异。