Skip to main content

Table 2 Sensitivity and specificity of the GLIM and PG-SGA for detecting cancer cachexia

From: Efficacy of Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition as potential cachexia screening tool for patients with solid cancer

 

Cachexia

No Cachexia

Sensitivity

Specificity

Accuracy

 
 

(n = 1441)

(n = 7037)

(%)

(%)

(%)

AUC

GLIM-step1

  

100

60.7

67.4

0.835

 Well nourished

0

4271

-

-

 

-

 Malnutrition

1441

2766

-

-

 

-

GLIM-step2

  

88.8

91.8

91.3

0.910

 Well nourished

162

6462

-

-

 

-

 Malnutrition

1279

575

-

-

 

-

PG-SGA

  

86.2

58.3

63.1

0.778

 Well nourished

199

4105

-

-

 

-

 Malnutrition

1242

2932

-

-

 

-

  1. AUC Area Under the ROC Curve, GLIM the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition, GLIM-step1 One-step GLIM criteria, GLIM-step2 Two-step GLIM criteria. One-step GLIM criteria and two-step GLIM criteria represented different GLIM criteria with or without nutrition risk screening by NRS-2002, respectively; PG-SGA Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment, PG-SGA Well nourished (Score < 4), Malnutrition (Score ≥ 4)