ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Nutr.
Sec. Clinical Nutrition
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fnut.2025.1642171
Diagnostic Consistency of GLIM Criteria and PG-SGA for Malnutrition in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer
Provisionally accepted- The First hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic consistency between the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria and the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) for identifying malnutrition in patients with pancreatic malignant tumors. Methods: A total of 108 pancreatic cancer patients from our hospital with a Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS) 2002 score ≥ 3 were enrolled. Demographic and clinical data were collected. Nutritional risk was assessed using NRS 2002, while malnutrition was evaluated by PG-SGA and GLIM criteria. The diagnostic consistency between GLIM and PG-SGA was analyzed using Cohen's kappa (κ) and prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK), including a subgroup analysis of malnutrition severity. Pearson correlation examined the relationship between these tools and conventional nutritional indicators, while T-tests were used to compare functional outcomes (handgrip strength) and clinical outcomes (length of stay) between nutritional groups. Results: The mean NRS 2002 score was 3.37 ± 0.98, with 75.0% (81/108) of patients identified as being at nutritional risk. Significant differences in nutritional risk were observed based on age, Body Mass Index (BMI), tumor stage, and tumor size (P < 0.05). Malnutrition prevalence was 60.2% (65/108) according to GLIM criteria and 63.9% (69/108) according to PG-SGA. The consistency analysis between GLIM and PG-SGA yielded a Cohen's kappa value of 0.71 (P < 0.01), indicating substantial agreement. The PABAK was 0.78, confirming substantial agreement after adjusting for prevalence effects. The agreement for malnutrition severity (GLIM Stage 1/2 vs. PG-SGA Moderate/Severe) was moderate (κ = 0.58). Both GLIM and PG-SGA scores demonstrated significant positive correlations with arm circumference (AC), calf circumference (CC), BMI, serum albumin (Alb), and hemoglobin (Hb) levels (P < 0.05). Furthermore, malnutrition diagnosed by either GLIM or PG-SGA was significantly associated with lower handgrip strength and longer hospital stays (P < 0.01). Conclusion: Patients with pancreatic malignant tumors exhibit a high prevalence of nutritional risk and malnutrition. The GLIM criteria and PG-SGA demonstrate good consistency in diagnosing malnutrition in this patient population. Both tools effectively identify patients with functional deficits and poorer clinical outcomes, supporting the utility of GLIM as a practical assessment tool in clinical settings.
Keywords: GLIM criteria, PG-SGA, Pancreatic Cancer, Malnutrition, Diagnostic consistency, Nutritional assessment
Received: 06 Jun 2025; Accepted: 28 Aug 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Wang, Wang, Zhang and Li. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Xiuli Li, The First hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.