Assessing the nutritional status of elderly Chinese lung cancer patients using the Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA^®) tool

Figures & data

Table 1 Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA^®) scores and anthropometry among 180 lung cancer patients categorized by nutritional status

	Whole group (n = 180), mean ± SD	Well nourished (n = 104), mean ± SD	At risk (n = 59), mean ± SD	Malnourished (n = 17), mean ± SD
MNA total (max score 30)	23.8 ± 3.6	26.3 ± 1.5*,a	21.6 ± 1.4*,a	16.2 ± 2.4*,a
BMI (kg/m^2)	24.6 ± 3.3	25.5 ± 3.0	24.1 ± 3.1	21.2 ± 3.7**,b
SFT (mm)	15.7 ± 7.6	16.7 ± 7.8	14.3 ± 6.9	14.8 ± 8.4
MAC (cm)	28.1 ± 3.1	28.6 ± 2.9	27.7 ± 3.4	26.4 ± 3.1
CC (cm)	32.3 ± 5.7	33.1 ± 5.7**,c	32.0 ± 5.4**,c	28.8 ± 5.8
ALB (g/L)	45.9 ± 8.1	46.5 ± 9.6	44.5 ± 4.0	46.8 ± 8.8
LC (10^Citation9/L)	2.1 ± 1.9	2.0 ± 0.8	2.2 ± 3.0	1.8 ± 0.7
HB (g/L)	137.1 ± 20.9	137.1 ± 24.9	139.0 ± 13.1	130.5 ± 14.3

Notes:

* P < 0.001;

** P < 0.05;

a Kruskal–Wallis test;

b compared with well nourished;

c compared with malnourished.

Abbreviations: ALB, albumin; BMI, body mass index; CC, calf circumference; HB, hemoglobin; LC, lymphocyte count; MAC, mid-arm circumference; SD, standard deviation; SFT, skin-fold thickness.

Table 2 Correlations of Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA^®) questions to total MNA score (n = 180)

MNA question	Spearman’s r	P value
Weight loss during the last 3 months	0.67	*
Self-perceived health status	0.65	*
Psychological stress	0.64	*
Food intake declined	0.63	*
Self-perceived nutritional status	0.61	*
BMI	0.49	*
Consumption of water	0.37	*
Protein intake	0.36	*
CC	0.31	*
Mobility	0.29	*
Three prescription drugs per day	0.24	**
Consumption of vegetables and fruit	0.22	**
Ability to eat	0.17	***
MAC	0.16	***
Neuropsychological problems	0.10	0.17
Independence	0.09	0.21
Number of meals eaten per day	0.05	0.48
Skin problems	0.05	0.51

Notes:

* P < 0.001;

** P < 0.01;

*** P < 0.05.

Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CC, calf circumference; MAC, mid-arm circumference.

Table 3 Comparison of Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA^®) subgroup question scores among 180 lung cancer patients categorized by nutritional status

MNA subgroup questions	Whole group (n = 178)		Well nourished (n = 104)		At risk (n = 59)		Malnourished (n = 17)
	Mean	95% CI	Mean	95% CI	Mean	95% CI	Mean	95% CI
I MNA anthropometrics	6.48	6.24–6.72	7.25*	7.06–7.44	5.92*	5.56–6.28	3.53*	2.53–4.53
II MNA global assessment	6.80	6.62–6.99	7.43*	7.26–7.61	6.05*	5.78–6.33	5.50*	4.85–6.15
III MNA dietary assessment	7.65	7.49–7.80	8.17*	8.04–8.31	7.15*	6.93–7.37	6.09*	5.48–6.70
IV MNA subjective assessment	2.86	2.70–3.01	3.41*	3.29–3.53	2.32*	2.07–2.57	1.28*	0.83–1.74

Notes: Kruskal–Wallis test.

* P < 0.05.

Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.

HolroydeCPReichardGAJrGeneral metabolic abnormalities in cancer patients: anorexia and cachexiaSurg Clin N Am19866659479563532380

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar