[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-333031-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-333031-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","comparison-of-the-prognostic-value-of-eight-nutrition-related-tools-in-older-patients-with-cancer-a-prospective-study","Comparison of the prognostic value of eight nutrition-related tools in older patients with cancer: A prospective study","","This prospective study evaluates and compares eight nutrition-related tools for predicting 1-year mortality in older patients with cancer. Participants were drawn from the ELCAPA cohort and referred for geriatric assessment at 14 geriatric oncology clinics in the greater Paris area between 2007 and 2018. Among 1361 patients, worsening nutrition-related risk categories were associated with higher mortality risk after adjustment. All models showed discrimination, and eight tools/markers remained independently linked to 1-year mortality, even when information was incomplete.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/comparison-of-the-prognostic-value-of-eight-nutrition-related-tools-in-older-patients-with-cancer-a-prospective-study/333031/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/comparison-of-the-prognostic-value-of-eight-nutrition-related-tools-in-older-patients-with-cancer-a-prospective-study/333031.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Ophelia","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-04","2026-09-21",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",8,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What was the primary objective of the study?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"To evaluate and compare the ability of eight nutrition-related tools to predict 1-year mortality in older patients with cancer.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"Who were the participants and where were they recruited?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Older patients with cancer from the ELCAPA cohort, referred for geriatric assessment at 14 participating geriatric oncology clinics in the greater Paris area of France between 2007 and 2018.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Which nutrition-related tools/markers were assessed?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"BMI, weight loss in the previous 6 months, Mini Nutritional Assessment, GNRI, Prognostic Nutritional Index, Glasgow Prognostic Score, modified GPS, and the C-reactive protein/albumin ratio.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},333031,1790148780,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":55,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":123,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},7971461741311,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/74000253aff267980c6?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1779345379180704826","The Journal of Nutrition, Health and Aging 28 (2024) 100188  \nContents lists available at ScienceDirect  \nThe Journal of Nutrition, Health and Aging  \njournal [homepage:](homepage: www. elsevier. com/locate/j nha)[ www. elsevier. com/locate/j nha](homepage: www. elsevier. com/locate/j nha)  \n| Original Article |  |  |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| Comparison of the prognostic value of eight nutrition-related tools in older patients with cancer: A prospective study |  |  | |\n| Rémi Valter a, Elena Paillaud a, b, Pascaline Boudou-Rouquette c, Nadia Oubaya a, d, Amélie Arégui e, Emmanuelle Lorisson f, Etienne Brain g, Godelieve Rochette de Lempdes g, Axelle Histeh, Marie Laurent a, i, Florence Canouï-Poitrine a, d, Philippe Caillet a, b, Amaury Broussier a,j, Claudia Martinez-Tapia a, *\u003Cbr>a Univ Paris Est Creteil, INSERM, IMRB, F-94010 Creteil, France\u003Cbr>bAP-HP, Paris Cancer Institute CARPEM, hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, département de gériatrie, F-75015 Paris, France c AP-HP, Cochin Hospital, Department of Medical Oncology, F-75014 Paris, France\u003Cbr>dAP-HP, Hopital Henri-Mondor, Service de Santé Publique, F-94010 Creteil, France\u003Cbr>e APHP, Hôpital St Louis, UCOG Paris Nord, F-75010 Paris, France f Geriatric Department, CHI Créteil, F-94000 Creteil, France g Institut Curie, 35 Rue Dailly, F-92210 Saint-Cloud, France\u003Cbr>hAP-HP, Hopital Henri-Mondor, Unité de Recherche Clinique, F-94010 Creteil, France\u003Cbr>iAP-HP, Hopital Henri-Mondor, Department of Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, F-94010 Creteil, France jAP-HP, Hopitaux Henri-Mondor/Emile Roux, Department of Geriatrics, F-94456 Limeil-Brevannes, France |  |  |  |\n| A R T I C L E I N F O |  | A B S T R A C T |  |\n| Keywords:\u003Cbr>Cancer\u003Cbr>Nutrition assessment Systemic inflammation Prognosis\u003Cbr>Mortality\u003Cbr>Geriatric assessment |  | Objectives: The primary objective of the present study was to evaluate and compare the ability of eight nutritionrelated tools to predict 1-year mortality in older patients with cancer.\u003Cbr>Design, setting and participants: We studied older patients with cancer from the ELCAPA cohort and who had been referred for a geriatric assessment at one of 14 participating geriatric oncology clinics in the greater Paris area of France between 2007 and 2018.\u003Cbr>Measurements: The studied nutrition-related tools/markers were the body mass index (BMI), weight loss (WL) in the previous 6 months, the Mini Nutritional Assessment, the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI), the Prognostic Nutritional Index, the Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS), the modified GPS, and the C-reactive protein/albumin ratio. Results: A total of 1361 patients (median age: 81; males: 51%; metastatic cancer: 49%) were included in the analysis. Most ofthe tools showed a progressively increase in the mortality risk asthe nutrition-related risk category worsened (overall p-values \u003C0.02 for all) after adjustment for age, outpatient status, functional status, severe comorbidities, cognition, mood, cancer treatment strategy, tumour site, and tumour metastasis. All the models were discriminant, with aC-index ranging from0.748(for the BMI)to0.762(for the GPS). The concordance probability estimate ranged from 0.764 (WL) to 0.773 (GNRI and GPS)).\u003Cbr>Conclusion: After adjustment for relevant prognostic factors, all eight nutrition-related tools/markers were independently associated with 1-year mortality in older patients with cancer. Depending on the time or context of the GA, physicians do not always have the time or means to perform and assess all the tools/markers compared here. However, even when some information is missing, each nutritional tool/marker has prognostic value and can be used in the evaluation.\u003Cbr>© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS on behalf of SERDI Publisher. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ([http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)). |  |\n\n* Corresponding author at: Clinical E","cbCaijOoAkTGHsXN","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaijOoAkTGHsXN","pdf",1862000,"English","# Objectives\n# Design, setting and participants\n# Measurements\n# Results\n## Discrimination and concordance\n# Conclusion\n# Introduction","[{\"question\":\"What was the primary objective of the study?\",\"answer\":\"To evaluate and compare the ability of eight nutrition-related tools to predict 1-year mortality in older patients with cancer.\"},{\"question\":\"Who were the participants and where were they recruited?\",\"answer\":\"Older patients with cancer from the ELCAPA cohort, referred for geriatric assessment at 14 participating geriatric oncology clinics in the greater Paris area of France between 2007 and 2018.\"},{\"question\":\"Which nutrition-related tools/markers were assessed?\",\"answer\":\"BMI, weight loss in the previous 6 months, Mini Nutritional Assessment, GNRI, Prognostic Nutritional Index, Glasgow Prognostic Score, modified GPS, and the C-reactive protein/albumin ratio.\"}]","Comparison of the prognostic value of eight nutrition-related tools in older patients with cancer: A prospective study | PDF",1790000394,25]