Banca de QUALIFICAÇÃO: BRUNA LUISA GOMES DE MIRANDA

Uma banca de QUALIFICAÇÃO de MESTRADO foi cadastrada pelo programa.
STUDENT : BRUNA LUISA GOMES DE MIRANDA
DATE: 11/12/2023
TIME: 14:00
LOCAL: Sessão pública realizada por meio de vídeo conferência: https://meet.google.com/xdd-wmoj-itg
TITLE:

MALNUTRITION AND MORTALITY RISK BY THE GLIM CRITERIA USIN DIFFERENT NUTRITIONAL RISK TOOLS IN PATIENTS WITH CANCER: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

KEY WORDS:

TUMOR, NUTRITIONAL STATUS, MALNUTRITION, NUTRITIONAL RISK TOOLS, MORTALITY

PAGES: 38
BIG AREA: Ciências da Saúde
AREA: Nutrição
SUMMARY:

Introduction: Cancer is the world's second leading cause of death and is associated with malnutrition. It is known that 20% of cancer patients die as a result of malnutrition and associated complications, rather than from the disease itself. In this sense, assessing risk and nutritional status in this population is imperative, in order to correctly and early detect the risk of malnutrition in these patients and favor early nutritional intervention in those who need it. Nutritional screening and diagnosis tools become indispensable in this process. Aim: To verify the prevalence of malnutrition and the risk of mortality by GLIM criteria using different screening tools in cancer patients. Methods: The study was a prospective cohort evaluating cancer patients in a hospital setting. Nutritional risk was assessed using the Nutritional Risk Emergency-2017 (NRE-2017), Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS-2002), Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST), Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and Nutriscore. Nutritional status was assessed using the GLIM criterion, a tool developed by the Global Leadership on Malnutrition. An accuracy test was carried out to check which nutritional screening had the greatest discriminatory power for malnutrition, and a Cox regression analysis was carried out to check the prevalence of mortality risk associated with the nutritional screenings. Results: 290 patients were assessed, the majority were elderly (60.3%), female (53.1%) and diagnosed with a solid tumor (89.7%).  When applying nutritional screening in step 0 of the GLIM assessment, the MUST tool identified more individuals (n = 170, 58.4%) at risk of malnutrition compared to the other tools. Similarly, the MUST tool was the most sensitive (75.1%) in identifying risk in individuals with malnutrition. With regard to the risk of mortality, after adjusting for confounding variables, the presence of malnutrition by GLIM, without prior application of screening methods, was associated with mortality (HR: 4.05; 95%CI 1.83 - 8.97; p = 0.001). The application of the NRE screening tool presented the greatest risk of mortality when applied prior to the GLIM criterion (HR: 4.78; 95%CI 3.00 -7.61; p < 0.001). Conclusion: When applying the GLIM criterion to assess malnutrition, different nutritional screening tools lead to different frequencies of malnutrition. The MUST tool seems to be the most sensitive, but all of them were associated with a higher risk of mortality.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
Presidente - 1879430 - ANA PAULA TRUSSARDI FAYH
Externa à Instituição - MARIA CRISTINA GONZALEZ - UFPel
Interna - 1452705 - SEVERINA CARLA VIEIRA CUNHA LIMA