Heimgartner, Joy

Abstract Magnesium (Mg) is an essential element involved in cellular metabolism. We demonstrated that in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) undergoing autologous stem cell transplant (SCT), those with a serum Mg < 2.0 mg/dL at the time of transplant had worse outcomes. In this study, we aimed to learn the prognostic value of low serum Mg in patients with untreated DLBCL. We analyzed serum from 408 patients and tested 2 Mg cutpoints—low (<1.7 mg/dL) and low normal (<2.0 mg/dL), a range we found associated with lower survival in the SCT group. We found 3% of patients with low levels and 23% with low normal levels. Low normal serum Mg levels were associated with a higher stage at diagnosis, more extranodal involvement, higher international prognostic index score, lower overall survival (OS), and event-free survival. These data warrant testing Mg replacement to a target of >2.0 mg/dL to learn if survival can be improved.

AbstractBackgroundReliable and valid tools to screen for malnutrition in the intensive care unit (ICU) remain elusive. The sarcopenia index (SI) [(serum creatinine/serum cystatin C) × 100], could be an inexpensive, objective tool to predict malnutrition. We evaluated the SI as a screening tool for malnutrition in the ICU and compared it with the modified‐NUTRIC score.Materials and MethodsThis was a historical cohort study of ICU patients with stable kidney function admitted to Mayo Clinic ICUs between 2008 and 2015. Malnutrition was defined by the Subjective Global Assessment. Diagnostic performance was evaluated with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and multivariable logistic regression.ResultsOf the 398 included patients, 181 (45%) had malnutrition, with 34 (9%) scored as severely malnourished. The SI was significantly lower in malnourished patients than in well‐nourished patients (64 ± 27 vs 72 ± 25; P = 0.002), and reductions in SI corresponded to increased malnutrition severity (P = 0.001). As a screening tool, the SI was an indicator of malnutrition risk (AUC 0.61) and performed slightly better than the more complex modified‐NUTRIC score (AUC = 0.57). SI cutoffs of 101 and 43 had >90% sensitivity and >90% specificity, respectively, for the prediction of malnutrition. Patients with a low SI (≤43) had a significantly higher risk of mortality (HR = 2.61, 95% CI 1.06–6.48, P = 0.038).ConclusionThe frequency of malnutrition was high in this critically ill population, and it was associated with a poor prognosis. The SI could be used to assess nutrition risk in ICU patients.