P1.07-06 Use of the Nutritional Risk Index as Screening for Malnutrition in Patients with Lung Cancer

Abstract

which 56 (58%) had histological confirmation. Conclusion: Our results show that, by coordinating care between the emergency and radiology departments and the lung cancer team, patients presenting unwell can be managed rapidly even if they remain in hospital. In addition, by actively seeking them out we can not only provide them with timely and appropriate investigations but also early CNS intervention, facilitating symptom management, the opportunity to maximise their performance status and offer psychological support to not only the patient but to their families as well. This approach also ensures that the managing medical teams are given the right information from a specialist team. The Lung Cancer Team resource is therefore focussed on looking after lung cancer patients and those patients that do not have cancer but are referred to the team are informed at the earliest opportunity and treatment decisions made accordingly by the team responsible for their care.

An Evaluation of Metabolic, Dietetic, and Nutritional Status Reveals Impaired Nutritional Outcomes in Breast Cancer Patients

“…BC group presented the lowest values of PhA, and the highest prevalence of low HGS, nutritional risk by NRI and overhydration by EW/TBW. All those parameters are considered indicators of poor nutritional status8,[53][54][55] . Regarding PhA, the BC group had values lower than the cutoff proposed byGupta et al (2008) in which values below 5.6 are considered a sign of poor prognosis for breast cancer patients8 .…”

An evaluation of metabolic, dietetic, and nutritional status reveals impaired nutritional outcomes in breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy compared with a matched control group

“…BC group presented the lowest values of PhA, and the highest prevalence of low HGS, nutritional risk by NRI and overhydration by EW/TBW. All those parameters are considered indicators of poor nutritional status8,[53][54][55] . Regarding PhA, the BC group had values lower than the cutoff proposed byGupta et al (2008) in which values below 5.6 are considered a sign of poor prognosis for breast cancer patients8 .…”