A newly developed assessment method that brings together a blood-based measurement and a physical body metric is showing promise for forecasting both survival chances and nutritional health in patients battling gastric cancer, according to Managed Healthcare Executive.
Gastric cancer continues to be a deadly disease worldwide, with survival rates particularly low in regions like East Asia due in large part to late diagnosis and frequent malnutrition. Many patients are diagnosed when the cancer is already advanced, making effective treatment more challenging. Malnutrition, a common complication, further undermines recovery, yet traditional risk assessments often overlook this critical factor.
Seeking a more thorough way to predict outcomes, Dr. Shulin Xian and a team of researchers created a dual-factor grading system using two different types of health indicators. The first is a blood test called the albumin-prealbumin-globulin ratio (APGR), which provides insight into the patient’s nutritional and immune health. The second is mid-arm circumference (MAC), a quick measurement of muscle and fat in the upper arm that gives a snapshot of a patient’s physical reserves.
Researchers analyzed data from more than 1,800 adults with confirmed gastric cancer, measuring both their APGR and MAC at diagnosis. Patients were grouped based on whether their scores were above or below certain thresholds: those with both measures in the healthy range were considered low risk, those with one low value were labeled moderate risk, and those with both values below threshold were deemed high risk.
The findings revealed a strong link between this combined grading system and patient outcomes. Individuals in the low-risk group had significantly better survival rates, with more than two-thirds still alive at follow-up, while survival dropped sharply in the moderate- and high-risk groups. Importantly, this dual approach outperformed either the blood test or arm measurement alone in predicting who would fare better or worse.
In addition to survival, the new grading system also correlated with the risk of malnutrition and cancer spread. Patients with healthier scores were much less likely to suffer from poor nutrition or to experience metastasis.
What sets this tool apart is its simplicity, affordability, and ease of use in everyday medical settings. It can be applied soon after diagnosis, providing doctors with valuable information to guide care decisions—including which patients might benefit from early nutritional support or more intensive monitoring. Since malnutrition is a factor that can often be improved with intervention, early detection using this method could open the door to better outcomes for many.
While the results are promising, the researchers note that additional studies in broader populations are needed to confirm the effectiveness of this assessment outside the original cohort. If validated, this approach could become an important part of personalized care in gastric cancer, helping ensure that patients at greatest risk are identified and treated more effectively from the outset.
