Malnutrition has been reported to lead to poor postoperative outcomes. The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria were published in 2019 as a global consensus on the criteria for diagnosing malnutrition. However, the relationship between GLIM-defined malnutrition and treatment outcomes in patients with cancer has not been fully investigated. Therefore, this study aimed to clarify the impact of GLIM-defined malnutrition on the treatment outcomes of patients with cancer. We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Platform Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov and identified observational studies published from inception to January 17, 2022. We conducted a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis studies that included patients with cancer aged >18 years who received any kind of treatment and whose nutritional status was assessed using GLIM criteria. We independently assessed the risk of bias and quality of evidence using Quality In Prognosis Studies and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and postoperative complications. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for OS and relative risk ratios and 95% CIs for postoperative complications were pooled. The protocol was published by PROSPERO (CRD42022304004). Of 67 studies after screening, ten studies (n = 11,700) reported the impact of GLIM-defined malnutrition on postoperative outcomes. Compared with no malnutrition, GLIM-defined malnutrition may worsen OS (hazard ratio, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.38-1.75; I² = 37%) and increase postoperative complications (relative risk ratio, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.28-2.60; I² = 87%). The risk of bias in each study was either moderate or high. The certainty of the evidence was low because of publication bias and a moderate or high risk of bias. GLIM-defined malnutrition may worsen OS and increase the risk of postoperative complications in patients with cancer undergoing treatment. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and mitigate this risk.

Objective: To clarify whether perioperative immunonutrition is effective in adult patients with or without malnutrition undergoing elective surgery for head and neck (HAN) or gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. Background: It is important to avoid postoperative complications in patients with cancer as they can compromise clinical outcomes. There is no consensus on the efficacy of perioperative immunonutrition in patients with or without malnutrition undergoing HAN or GI cancer surgery. Materials and Methods: We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science Core Selection, and Emcare from 1981 to 2022 using search terms related to immunonutrition and HAN or GI cancer. We included randomized controlled trials. Intervention was defined as immunonutritional therapy including arginine, n-3 omega fatty acids, or glutamine during the perioperative period. The control was defined as standard nutritional therapy. The primary outcomes were total postoperative and infectious complications, defined as events with a Clavien–Dindo classification grade ≥ II that occurred within 30 days after surgery. Results: Of the 4825 patients from 48 included studies, 19 had upper GI cancer, 9 had lower, and 8 had mixed cancer, whereas 12 had HAN cancers. Immunonutrition reduced the total postoperative complications (relative risk ratio: 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66–0.93; certainty of evidence: high) and infectious complications (relative risk ratio: 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61–0.82; certainty of evidence: high) compared with standard nutritional therapy. Conclusions: Nutritional intervention with perioperative immunonutrition in patients with HAN and GI cancers significantly reduced total postoperative complications and infectious complications.

There is no consensus on the efficacy of perioperative immunonutrition in patients with upper gastrointestinal (GI) cancer surgery. We clarified the impact of perioperative immunonutrition on postoperative outcomes in patients with upper GI cancers. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science Core Selection, and Emcare from 1981–2022 using search terms related to immunonutrition and upper GI cancer. We included randomized controlled trials. Intervention was defined as immunonutritional therapy, including arginine, n-3 omega fatty acids, or glutamine during the perioperative period. The control was defined as standard nutritional therapy. The primary outcomes were infectious complications, defined as events with a Clavien–Dindo classification grade ≥ II that occurred within 30 days after surgery. After screening, 23 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis and in the quantitative synthesis. The meta-analysis showed that immunonutrition reduced infectious complications (relative risk ratio: 0.72; 95% confidence interval: 0.57–0.92; certainty of evidence: Moderate) compared with standard nutritional therapy. In conclusion, nutritional intervention with perioperative immunonutrition in patients with upper GI cancers significantly reduced infectious complications. The effect of immunonutrition for upper GI cancers in reducing the risk of infectious complications was about 30%.

There is no consensus on the relationship between visceral fat mass and long-term postoperative prognosis in patients with upper gastrointestinal (GI) cancer. : The purpose of this study was to investigate the association of preoperative visceral fat mass with postoperative complications and overall survival (OS) in patients with upper GI cancer. We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE (Dialog), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Platform Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov and identified observational studies published from inception through July 20, 2022. We conducted a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of studies including patients who were surgically treated for upper GI cancer and whose visceral fat mass was assessed on the basis of body composition. We independently assessed the risk of bias and quality of evidence using Quality In Prognosis Studies and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach, respectively. The primary outcome was OS. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for OS were pooled. Ninety-one studies (N=20583) were included. All studies used computed tomography (CT) to assess the body composition of patients. Twenty-four studies reported the relationship between high visceral fat and postoperative outcomes, and their results were synthesized. Compared with low visceral adipose tissue, high visceral adipose tissue assessed by CT may improve OS (hazard ratio: 0.69; 95%CI: 0.55, 0.87; I² = 65%; n=3407). The risk of bias for OS in each study was moderate or high. The certainty of evidence for OS was very low because of inconsistency in the forest plot, the moderate or high risk of bias and publication bias. High visceral fat may be associated with improved OS after radical resection in patients with upper GI cancer. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and mitigate the risk.

This study investigated the paradox of high visceral fat mass increasing severe complications but improving long-term prognosis after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. This was a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with primary stage I–III gastric cancer who underwent gastrectomy between April 2008 and June 2018. The visceral adipose tissue index (VAI) was calculated by dividing the visceral fat mass preoperatively measured on computed tomography by the square of the height. Patients with VAIs below the median cut-off value were classified as low-VAI, while those above it were classified as high-VAI. We compared the postoperative complication rate and overall survival (OS) in the low- and high-VAI groups after adjusting patient characteristics using propensity score matching (PSM). There were 155 patients in both groups after PSM. After matching, there was no significant difference in factors other than BMI and VAI that were not adjusted. The high-VAI group had more severe postoperative complications (p = 0.018), but the OS was significantly better in the high-VAI group (hazard ratio 0.611, 95%CI 0.403–0.928, p = 0.021). Preoperative high visceral fat mass not only increased severe complications, but also improved OS after gastrectomy in patients with advanced gastric cancer.