Malnutrition is highly prevalent in people with head and neck cancer (HCN) and is associated with poorer outcomes. However, variation in malnutrition diagnostic criteria has made translation of the most effective interventions into practice challenging. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of malnutrition in a HNC population according to the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria and assess inter-rater reliability and predictive validity. A secondary analysis of data available for 188 patients with HNC extracted from two cancer malnutrition point prevalence studies was conducted. A GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition was assigned when one phenotypic and one etiologic criterion were present. Phenotypic criteria were ≥5% unintentional loss of body weight, body mass index (BMI), and subjective evidence of muscle loss. Etiologic criteria were reduced food intake, and presence of metastatic disease as a proxy for inflammation. The prevalence of malnutrition was 22.6% (8.0% moderately malnourished; 13.3% severely malnourished). Inter-rater reliability was classified as excellent for the GLIM criteria overall, as well as for each individual criterion. A GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition was found to be significantly associated with BMI but was not predictive of 30 day hospital readmission. Further large, prospective cohort studies are required in this patient population to further validate the GLIM criteria.

Background: Identification and treatment of malnutrition are essential in upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer. However, there is limited understanding of the nutritional status of UGI cancer patients at the time of curative surgery. This prospective point prevalence study involving 27 Australian tertiary hospitals investigated nutritional status at the time of curative UGI cancer resection, as well as presence of preoperative nutrition impact symptoms, and associations with length of stay (LOS) and surgical complications. Methods: Subjective global assessment, hand grip strength (HGS) and weight were performed within 7 days of admission. Data on preoperative weight changes, nutrition impact symptoms, and dietary intake were collected using a purpose-built data collection tool. Surgical LOS and complications were also recorded. Multivariate regression models were developed for nutritional status, unintentional weight loss, LOS and complications. Results: This study included 200 patients undergoing oesophageal, gastric and pancreatic surgery. Malnutrition prevalence was 42% (95% confidence interval (CI) 35%, 49%), 49% lost ≥5% weight in 6 months, and 47% of those who completed HGS assessment had low muscle strength with no differences between surgical procedures (p = 0.864, p = 0.943, p = 0.075, respectively). The overall prevalence of reporting at least one preoperative nutrition impact symptom was 55%, with poor appetite (37%) and early satiety (23%) the most frequently reported. Age (odds ratio (OR) 4.1, 95% CI 1.5, 11.5, p = 0.008), unintentional weight loss of ≥5% in 6 months (OR 28.7, 95% CI 10.5, 78.6, p < 0.001), vomiting (OR 17.1, 95% CI 1.4, 207.8, 0.025), reduced food intake lasting 2–4 weeks (OR 7.4, 95% CI 1.3, 43.5, p = 0.026) and ≥1 month (OR 7.7, 95% CI 2.7, 22.0, p < 0.001) were independently associated with preoperative malnutrition. Factors independently associated with unintentional weight loss were poor appetite (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6, 8.4, p = 0.002) and degree of solid food reduction of <75% (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2, 9.2, p = 0.02) and <50% (OR 4.9, 95% CI 1.5, 15.6, p = 0.008) of usual intake. Malnutrition (regression coefficient 3.6, 95% CI 0.1, 7.2, p = 0.048) and unintentional weight loss (regression coefficient 4.1, 95% CI 0.5, 7.6, p = 0.026) were independently associated with LOS, but no associations were found for complications. Conclusions: Despite increasing recognition of the importance of preoperative nutritional intervention, a high proportion of patients present with malnutrition or clinically significant weight loss, which are associated with increased LOS. Factors associated with malnutrition and weight loss should be incorporated into routine preoperative screening. Further investigation is required of current practice for dietetics interventions received prior to UGI surgery and if this mitigates the impact on clinical outcomes.

Background: Preoperative nutrition intervention is recommended prior to upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer resection; however, there is limited understanding of interventions received in current clinical practice. This study investigated type and frequency of preoperative dietetics intervention and nutrition support received and clinical and demographic factors associated with receipt of intervention. Associations between intervention and preoperative weight loss, surgical length of stay (LOS), and complications were also investigated. Methods: The NOURISH Point Prevalence Study was conducted between September 2019 and May 2020 across 27 Australian tertiary centres. Subjective global assessment and weight were performed within 7 days of admission. Patients reported on preoperative dietetics and nutrition intervention, and surgical LOS and complications were recorded. Results: Two-hundred patients participated (59% male, mean (standard deviation) age 67 (10)). Sixty percent had seen a dietitian preoperatively, whilst 50% were receiving nutrition support (92% oral nutrition support (ONS)). Patients undergoing pancreatic surgery were less likely to receive dietetics intervention and nutrition support than oesophageal or gastric surgeries (p < 0.001 and p = 0.029, respectively). Neoadjuvant therapy (p = 0.003) and malnutrition (p = 0.046) remained independently associated with receiving dietetics intervention; however, 31.3% of malnourished patients had not seen a dietitian. Patients who received ≥3 dietetics appointments had lower mean (SD) percentage weight loss at the 1-month preoperative timeframe compared with patients who received 0–2 appointments (1.2 (2.0) vs. 3.1 (3.3), p = 0.001). Patients who received ONS for >2 weeks had lower mean (SD) percentage weight loss than those who did not (1.2 (1.8) vs. 2.9 (3.4), p = 0.001). In malnourished patients, total dietetics appointments ≥3 was independently associated with reduced surgical complications (odds ratio 0.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1, 0.9, p = 0.04), and ONS >2 weeks was associated with reduced LOS (regression coefficient −7.3, 95% CI −14.3, −0.3, p = 0.04). Conclusions: Despite recommendations, there are low rates of preoperative dietetics consultation and nutrition support in this population, which are associated with increased preoperative weight loss and risk of increased LOS and complications in malnourished patients. The results of this study provide insights into evidence–practice gaps for improvement and data to support further research regarding optimal methods of preoperative nutrition support.