Background/Objectives: Gastric, oesophageal, and pancreatic cancers are common worldwide, with low but improving survival rates due to advances in curative treatments. However, these treatments often cause long-term nutrition impact symptoms that are frequently overlooked, leading to malnutrition and poorer health outcomes. This review explored the types of nutrition impact symptoms following curative-intent treatment for upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancers and assessed their impact on nutrition status. Methods: A systematic search of four electronic databases identified studies involving adults treated with curative intent for UGI cancers. Included studies reported both nutrition impact symptoms and nutrition outcomes using validated tools. Study quality was assessed, and results were synthesised narratively. Results: Eleven studies (n = 953 participants), predominantly from the Asia–Pacific region, met the inclusion criteria. Participants were mostly male (68%), with surgery as the primary treatment (91%). Most studies (n = 10) used validated assessment tools to identify nutrition impact symptoms. Reflux was the most commonly reported symptom (n = eight studies), followed by abdominal pain and diarrhoea. Nutrition status was assessed using various validated tools: Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (n = six studies, 55%), Mini Nutritional Assessment (n = two studies, 18%), and Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition as well as Subjective Global Assessment and Prognostic Nutritional Index (both n = one study, 9%). Malnutrition prevalence was up to 87% one year post-treatment. Conclusions: Nutrition impact symptoms are common and persistent after curative-intent treatment for UGI cancers. Future research should incorporate validated assessment tools and extend follow-up beyond 12 months. Integrating long-term, tailored dietetic support to identify and manage symptoms post-treatment is vital to improve outcomes for patients.

Aim: To assess the prevalence of undernutrition, overnutrition, and simultaneous malnutrition in a hospital setting, as well as undernutrition risk and dietetic intervention rates. Methods: A point prevalence survey was conducted annually from 2016 to 2024 (excluding 2020–2021 due to Coronavirus Disease 2019) across three metropolitan health service hospital sites. Eligible multiday inpatients underwent bedside assessments and medical record reviews to determine Body Mass Index, Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool scores, and undernutrition status based on either the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, or the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition. Data were analysed descriptively. Results: Of 5186 patients surveyed, 21.2% were undernourished, 39.5% were overnourished, and 4.8% were simultaneously under‐ and overnourished. Just over one‐third (37.4%) of all participants were at risk of undernutrition. Dietitian intervention rates were highest among the simultaneously malnourished (70.6%) and undernourished (69.6%), and low among the overnourished (3.6%). Conclusion: The findings underscore the need for improved detection of simultaneous malnutrition and increased rates (towards 100%) of dietary intervention among patients with either under‐ or simultaneous malnutrition during a patient's hospital stay.

Background: Pancreatic cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related death in Australia, with a persistently poor 5-year survival rate of around 13%. Symptoms arising from the disease and chemotherapy such as epigastric pain, anorexia, bloating and fat-malabsorptive diarrhoea cause poor oral intake and weight loss, and reduce an individual’s quality of life and ability to tolerate anti-cancer treatment. The primary aim of this study is to determine if an early, intensive telehealth nutrition intervention can improve quality of life compared to usual care for people undergoing treatment for pancreatic cancer. Methods: This multicentre randomised controlled trial will recruit adults newly diagnosed with borderline resectable, locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer from multiple health services across Victoria (metropolitan and regional). The control group will receive usual nutrition care, which is site-dependent. The intervention group will receive weekly telehealth dietetic consultations for six months, targeting nutritional adequacy through dietary education and counselling, oral nutrition supplement drinks and dietetics-led symptom management advocacy, including appropriate dosing of pancreatic enzymes. Escalation to supplemental jejunal tube feeding may occur if clinically required in the intervention arm. The primary outcome is quality of life (EORTC-QLQ C30 summary score); secondary outcomes include survival, chemotherapy dosing changes, and nutrition status markers including body composition. Outcomes will be measured at baseline, and three- and six-months. Discussion: The findings of this study will provide evidence of the impact that intensive nutrition therapy, including counselling, provision of oral nutrition supplement drinks and the option for jejunal feeding, has on quality of life and health outcomes in pancreatic cancer. The consistent dietetic approach with the use of telehealth consultations to reduce malnutrition and aid symptom management challenges the current model of care. Trial registration: 31st January 2024, Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (Trial ID/No. ACTRN12624000084583).