Table 4.
Relationship between SPA and nutritional status.
| Study | Cut-Off Value | Nutritional Indicators Related to SPA 9 |
Main Findings |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pena, 2019 [13] | −1.65° | PT-SGA 7, HGS 3, MAC 5, MMA 6 | Patients with SPA 9 < −1.65 had greater chance of malnourishment with low PT-SGA 7, MAC 5, MMA 6, and HGS 3. |
| Yates, 2020 [47] | 25th: −0.948° | Albumin | SPA 9 < −0.948 was positively related to albumin. |
| Norman, 2010 [34] | 5th | PT-SGA 7, EORTC 2 | SPA 9 below 5th percentile value emerged as a significant predictor for malnutrition and impaired functional status in generalized linear model regression analyses. |
| Leon-Idougourram, 2022 [51] | −1.65° | Arm circumference, calf circumference, BMI 1, CRP 8, IL-6 4, thigh adipose tissue | Serum CRP 8 and IL-6 4 were most reliable parameters for determining patients with decreased SPA 9. |
| Cereda, 2021 [53] | −1.65° | HGS 3, BMI 1, weight loss | In patients with SPA 9 < −1.65, worse nutritional and functional status were observed. |
Abbreviations: 1 BMI: body mass index; 2 EORTC: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer; 3 HGS: handgrip strength; 4 IL-6: interleucine-6; 5 MAC: midarm circumference; 6 MMA: muscular midarm circumference; 7 PT-SGA: Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment; 8 CRP: C-reactive protein; 9 SPA: standardized phase angle.