Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment in relation to site, stage of the illness, reason for hospital admission, and mortality in patients with gynecological tumors

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to identify factors related to the illness and to oncological treatment as determinants of the nutritional status of patients with gynecological tumors.

Methods

This is a retrospective study; the group was composed of 146 women histopathologically shown to have gynecological tumors, at different stages of treatment, and hospitalized at the foremost centers for the prevention and treatment of cancer in Rio de Janeiro. To obtain a nutritional diagnosis, we used the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA). We did multiple comparisons of the numeric variables between the three PG-SGA nutritional status-classification groups by performing Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance. We used the Mann-Whitney test to compare numerical variables between two groups. We analyzed the associations between categorical variables by using either the chi-squared (χ 2) test or Fisher’s exact test.

Results

Of the women, 62.4 % were found to be at nutritional risk or to have some level of malnourishment, being more associated with the reason for hospital admission and stage disease that properly to the tumor site. The median PG-SGA score was points, with 62.3 % of the group returning 9 or more points. Women diagnosed with endometrial cancer were found to be predominantly well nourished, and those with tumors in the ovary were more frequently diagnosed as being severely malnourished.

Conclusions

Our findings support early nutritional intervention in the population identified as being at greater nutritional risk, aiming to minimize the loss of muscle mass and body weight, as well as to improve symptoms management, thus helping to achieve better clinical results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Peres GB, Valim GS, Silva VL, El-Kik RM (2009) Comparação entre métodos de Avaliação Subjetiva Global em oncologia. Rev Ciênc Saúde 2:37–42

    Google Scholar 

  2. Laky B, Janda M, Kondalsamy-Channakesavan S et al (2010) Pretreatment malnutrition and quality of life-association with prolonged length of hospital stay among patients with gynecological cancer: a cohort study. BMC Cancer. doi:10.1186/1471-2407-10-232

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ottery FD (1996) Definition of standardized nutritional assessment and interventional pathways in oncology. Nutrition 12:15–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Davies M (2005) Nutritional screening and assessment in cancer-associated malnutrition. Eur J Oncol Nurs 9:64–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Laky B, Janda M, Cleghorn G et al (2008) Comparison of different nutritional assessments and body composition measurements in detecting malnutrition among gynecologic cancer patients. Am J Clin Nutr 87:1678–1685

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Laky B, Janda M, Bauer J et al (2007) Malnutrition among gynaecological cancer patients. Eur J Clin Nutr 61:642–646

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ottery FD (2000) Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment. In: The clinical guide to oncology nutrition. Am Diet Assoc 11–23

  8. Gonzalez MC, Borges LR, Silveira DH, Assunção MCF, Orlandi SP (2010) Validação da versão em português da avaliação subjetiva global produzida pelo paciente. Rev Bras Nutr Clin 25:102–108

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pecotelli S (2009) Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynecol Obstet 105:103–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Santoso JT, Canada T, Latson B et al (2000) Prognostic nutritional index in relation to hospital stay in women with gynecologic cancer. Obstet Gynecol 95:844–846

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bozzetti F, Migliavacca S, Scotti A (1982) Impact of cancer, type, site, stage and treatment on the nutritional status of patients. Ann Surg 196:170–174

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tunca JC (1983) Nutritional evaluation of gynecologic cancer patients during initial diagnosis of their disease. Am J Obstet Gynecol 147:893–896

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zorlini AR, Cairo AA, Gurgel MS (2008) Nutritional status of patients with gynecologic and breast cancer. Nutr Hosp 23:577–583

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gupta D, Lammersfeld CA, Vashi PG et al (2008) Can subjective global assessment of nutritional status predict survival in ovarian cancer? J Ovarian Res. doi:10.1186/1757-2215-1-5

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Herrinton LJ, Neslund-Dudas C, Rolnick SJ et al (2007) Complications at the end of life in ovarian cancer. J Pain Symptom Manage 34:237–243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hennessy BT, Coleman RL, Markman M (2009) Ovarian cancer. Lancet 374:1371–1382

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Schmandt RE, Iglesias DA, Co NN et al (2011) Understanding obesity and endometrial cancer risk: opportunities for prevention. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205:518–525

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Leslie KK (2012) Endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am 39:255–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Shadad AK, Sullivan FJ, Martin JD, Egan LJ (2013) Gastrointestinal radiation injury: prevention and treatment. World J Gastroenterol 19:199–208

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Calixto-Lima L, Martins de Andrade E, Gomes AP et al (2012) Dietetic management in gastrointestinal complications from antimalignant chemotherapy. Nutr Hosp 27:65–75

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Blanchard CM, Denniston MM, Baker F et al (2003) Do adults change their lifestyle behaviours after a cancer diagnosis. Am J Health Behav 27:246–256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Eickmeyer SM, Gamble GL, Shahpar S (2012) The role and efficacy of exercise in persons with cancer. PMR 4:874–881

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Raaf PJ, Klerk C, Timman R et al (2013) Systematic monitoring and treatment of physical symptoms to alleviate fatigue in patients with advanced cancer: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 31:716–723

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Caro MM, Laviano A, Pichard C (2007) Nutritional intervention and quality of life in adult oncology patients. Clin Nutr 26:289–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tisdale MJ (2009) Mechanisms of cancer cachexia. Physiol Rev 89:381–410

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bauer J, Capra S, Ferguson M (2002) Use of the scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) as a nutrition assessment tool in patients with cancer. Eur J Clin Nutr 56:779–785

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Pressoir M, Desné S, Berchery D et al (2010) Prevalence, risk factors and clinical implications of malnutrition in French Comprehensive Cancer Centres. Br J Cancer 102:966–971

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Barbosa-Silva MC, Barros AJD (2006) Indications and limitations of the use of subjective global assessment in clinical practice: an update. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 9:263–269

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Norman K, Pichard C, Lochs H, Pirlich M (2008) Prognostic impact of disease-related malnutrition. Clin Nutr 27:5–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None of the authors has a conflict of interest.

Authors’ contributions

GVC designed and coordinated the study and acquired, analyzed, and interpreted the data. CSR acquired, analyzed, and interpreted the data and wrote the manuscript. All authors participated in editing and final revisions of the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Camila Santos Rodrigues.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rodrigues, C.S., Chaves, G.V. Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment in relation to site, stage of the illness, reason for hospital admission, and mortality in patients with gynecological tumors. Support Care Cancer 23, 871–879 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-014-2409-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-014-2409-7

Keywords

Navigation