Impact of the Nutritional Support on the Response of the Anatomical Site of Gastrointestinal Malignancy to the treatment in Cancer Patient in Qena | ||
| SVU-International Journal of Medical Sciences | ||
| Article 85, Volume 7, Issue 2, July 2024, Pages 982-994 PDF (361.26 K) | ||
| Document Type: Original research articles | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/svuijm.2024.319184.1977 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Sarah Galal Ismaeil* 1; Ahmed Mohamed Mahmoud Hany2; Gad Sayed Gad3; Mohammed Moustafa Ali Wahman1 | ||
| 1Clinical Oncology and Nuclear Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, South Valley University, Qena, Egypt. | ||
| 2Public Health and Community Department, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt. | ||
| 3Anesthesia and Intensive Care Department, Faculty of Medicine, South Valley University, Qena, Egypt | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Background: Nutritional status affects gastrointestinal cancer prognosis, which treatment worsens. Malnutrition assessment and management by the PG-SGA improves prognosis and treatment tolerance. Malnourished individuals exhibited worse survival, treatment tolerance, and infection risks. Customised diets decrease risks and increase performance. Objectives: Investigate how tailored nutritional support influences the treatment outcomes of gastrointestinal cancer patients, focusing on the anatomical site-specific responses to various therapeutic interventions. Patients and methods: A randomized controlled clinical trial at Qena University Hospital included 60 patients with GIT cancer, using PG-SGA for nutritional assessment. Criteria: age 20-65, confirmed GIT cancer. Methods: history, physical exams, tumor biopsies. PG-SGA scores correlated with treatment response and serum protein levels. Results: Patients were mostly female (60%), the mean age 47.50 years old, and had diabetes (20%) and hypertension (30%). BMI showed 30% underweight, 20% healthy, 20% overweight, and 30% obese. Colon cancer (40%), cholangiocarcinoma (20%), and pancreatic cancer (20%) were predominantly stage IV (60%) and regressive (70%). PG-SGA scores were significantly associated with age, comorbidities, tumor features, treatment response++, and performance status(p<0.001). PG-SGA was positively correlated with performance status (r=0.611, p<0.001), age (r=0.513, p<0.001), and negatively correlated with blood protein levels (r=-0.296, p=0.022). Nutrition assistance is linked to BMI, body surface area, and blood protein levels (p<0.001), highlighting its impact on clinical outcomes. Conclusion: GI cancer patients need nutritional assessment and support. PG-SGA has identified older men with advanced tumors and comorbidities as high-risk. BMI, body surface area, serum protein and clinical outcomes improve with nutrition support. Regular dietary assessments improve GI cancer prognosis. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Nutritional status assessment; GI cancer patients; PG-SGA; Nutritional support | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 156 PDF Download: 77 |
||
