The Relationship Between Nutritional Status and Chemotherapy Toxicity in Patients with Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Cervical cancer imposes a significant global health burden, disproportionately affecting low- and middle-income countries where malnutrition is also endemic. Antineoplastic therapy, particularly concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) with platinum-based agents, is the standard of care but is associated with severe toxicities. This systematic review investigates the central hypothesis that poor nutritional status—defined by a range of anthropometric, serological, and body composition metrics—is an independent and significant predictor of increased chemotherapy-related toxicity in cervical cancer patients. Methods: This review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library was performed to identify studies evaluating the relationship between nutritional status and chemotherapy toxicity in cervical cancer patients. Eligibility criteria were based on the Population (cervical cancer patients), Exposure (malnutrition), Comparison (well-nourished), and Outcome (toxicity) framework. Methodological quality was appraised using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for observational studies. Results: A total of 16 studies (2 RCTs and 14 observational cohorts) met the inclusion criteria. The results demonstrate a consistent and statistically significant association between malnutrition and increased treatment toxicity. Specifically, poor nutritional status assessed by the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) was an independent predictor of both Grade 3+ toxicity and Toxicity-Induced Modification of Treatment (TIMT). Sarcopenia (low Skeletal Muscle Index, SMI) was significantly associated with higher rates of treatment interruption due to toxicity (p=0.024) and was a determining factor for Grade 3+ adverse events. Low Body Mass Index (BMI < 18.5 kg/m²) was linked to severe Grade 3/4 gastrointestinal complications, including bowel obstruction (p<0.001). A low Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) correlated with increased severity of fatigue, nausea, and diarrhea (p<0.05). Nutritional interventions, such as omega-3 supplementation, were shown in an RCT to significantly reduce the incidence of chemotherapy toxicity. Discussion: The evidence converges to confirm that malnutrition is a critical determinant of chemotherapy tolerance. The mechanisms are multifactorial. Pharmacokinetic alterations, such as hypoalbuminemia, increase the free, active fraction of protein-bound drugs, leading to toxicity. Pharmacodynamic failures, particularly in sarcopenic patients, result in a relative overdose from standard Body Surface Area (BSA)-based dosing due to a smaller volume of distribution. Malnutrition also impairs the host's ability to repair healthy tissue (e.g., gut mucosa, bone marrow) damaged by chemotherapy. Conclusion: Nutritional status is a powerful, modifiable predictor of severe chemotherapy-related toxicity in cervical cancer patients. These findings mandate the integration of nutritional screening (e.g., PG-SGA) and objective assessment (e.g., CT-based SMI) into routine oncological practice. Such screening can risk-stratify patients and trigger pre-emptive nutritional interventions to improve treatment tolerance, reduce toxicity-related interruptions, and optimize clinical outcomes
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.052 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".