Background: Obesity is as an important risk factor for chronic diseases. Metabolically healthy obesity (MHO) is considered a benign state. The association between metabolic health and obesity categories and cancer risk remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between metabolic health status combined with obesity phenotypes and the risk of cancer.Methods: Data from 91,834 participants in the Kailuan cohort were analyzed, excluding individuals with a body mass index (BMI) < 18.5 kg/m² and those with a history of cancer. Obesity phenotypes were classified based on BMI and waist circumference (WC) combined with metabolic health status, resulting in six phenotypes. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to assess the association between metabolic health and obesity phenotypes with cancer risk and all-cause mortality.Results: The prevalence of metabolically healthy obesity and metabolically unhealthy obesity defined by BMI was 6.86% and 12.18%, while that defined by WC was 20.79% and 25.76%, respectively. Compared to metabolically healthy participants, individuals with an unhealthy metabolic status had a significantly higher risk of cancer (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.03–1.15; p=0.004). The hazard ratios for cancer were 1.19, 1.23, 1.20, and 1.55 for individuals with one, two, three, and four metabolic disorders, respectively. Among those classified as metabolically unhealthy, both overweight and obesity were associated with a protective effect on cancer risk (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80–0.96; p=0.006 for overweight; HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78–0.97; p=0.010 for obesity). However, abdominal obesity significantly increased cancer risk in both metabolically healthy and unhealthy participants. In subgroup analysis, simple obesity showed a protective trend against cancer in those with respiratory cancers, while abdominal obesity consistently posed a risk for various cancer types.Conclusion: Metabolically unhealthy status and abdominal obesity are risk factors for cancer and all-cause mortality, whereas simple obesity offers protective effects against cancer and all-cause mortality in metabolically unhealthy individuals. These findings suggest that maintaining metabolic health and reducing the metabolic risks associated with abdominal obesity should be key targets for cancer prevention.

Background: Hematologic malignancies pose a critical threat to global health, with their pathological progression intrinsically linked to metabolic dysregulation and nutrient imbalance. Malnutrition accelerates the trajectory of adverse outcomes while substantially diminishing the quality of survival. Although several nutritional assessment tools are currently used in clinical practice, a significant evidence gap persists regarding their validation in populations with hematologic neoplasms. This study systematically evaluates the prognostic performance of existing nutritional assessment instruments in this cohort. Based on these findings, we further explored the feasibility of a preliminary framework that reflects metabolic characteristics specific to this population. Methods: This prospective cohort study analyzed nutritional assessment data from 1067 patients with hematologic malignancies enrolled in the INSCOC registry. Eight assessment systems were examined: Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA), Modified PGSGA (mPG-SGA), PGSGA Short Form (PG-SGA SF), Abbreviated PGSGA (abPG-SGA), Nutritional Risk Screening-2002 (NRS-2002), Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition criteria (GLIM), Scored-GLIM, and Karnofsky Performance Status Scale (KPS). Kaplan–Meier survival curves and multivariate Cox regression analyses were conducted to investigate the association between nutritional status and overall survival (OS) and to determine the prognostic weight of individual components within the nutritional assessment tools. Linear regression models were applied to examine the relationships between nutritional assessment tools, length of hospital stay (LOS), and EORTC QLQ-C30 scores. The predictive performance of the tools was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the concordance index (C-index). Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression was applied to optimize the selection of inflammation-related biomarkers. Results: A total of 1067 participants were analyzed (mean [SD] age, 55.54 [17.4] years; 625 were male [58.6%]). Cox proportional hazards regression demonstrated statistically significant associations for all eight nutritional assessment tools (p ≤ 0.05). However, their prognostic discrimination was limited, as indicated by the AUC analysis. Specifically, the area under the curve (AUC) values for each tool were as follows: mPG-SGA, 0.561; NRS-2002, 0.557; PG-SGA, 0.550; KPS, 0.544; PG-SGA SF, 0.542; abPG-SGA, 0.528; Scored-GLIM, 0.489; and GLIM, 0.473. The concordance index validation further corroborated these findings. Prognostically significant components and inflammation-related biomarkers identified by Cox and LASSO regression were combined to explore a composite assessment approach, termed the Hematologic Marker–Patient Generated Subjective Global Assessment (HMPG-SGA), incorporating the albumin–globulin ratio (AGR). The HMPG-SGA was significantly associated with overall survival (p < 0.001), with an AUC of 0.616 and a C-index of 0.605. Conclusions: Multidimensional validation demonstrated limited prognostic discrimination of eight conventional nutritional assessment tools for overall survival in patients with hematologic malignancies. Based on existing assessment tools and integrated hematologic indicators, the HMPG-SGA was preliminarily explored as a prognostic assessment tool in hematologic malignancies.