Evidence Hub

Association of Malnutrition-Inflammation Score with Quality of Life and Mortality in Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients: a 5-Year Prospective Cohort Study

M. Rambod, R. Bross, J. Zitterkoph, D. Benner, Juhi Pithia, Sara Colman, C. Kovesdy, J. Kopple et al.

American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 2008

331 citations

Abstract

Background The Malnutrition-Inflammation Score (MIS), a non-expensive and easy-to-assess score between 0 and 30 to examine protein-energy wasting (PEW) and inflammation, includes 7 components of the subjective global assessment, body mass index, and serum albumin and transferrin concentrations. We hypothesized that the MIS risk-stratification of chronic hemodialysis (HD) patients in predicting outcomes is better than its components or laboratory markers of inflammation. Study Design 5-year cohort study. Setting & Participants We examined 809 stable HD outpatients and followed them for up to 5 years (10/2001–12/2006). Predictors MIS and other nutritional and inflammatory markers. Outcomes & Measurements Prospective all-cause mortality, health-related quality of life via SF-36, and tests of body composition. Results The MIS was correlated with serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) (r=+0.26, p<0.001), C-reactive protein (CRP) (r=+0.16, p<0.001) and several measures of nutritional status. Patients with higher MIS had lower SF-36 scores. After multivariate adjustment for case-mix and other measures of PEW, the chronic HD patients in the second (3–4), third (5–7) and fourth (≥8) quartiles of MIS had worse survival rates than those in the first (0–2) quartile (p<0.001). Each 2 unit increase in MIS was associated with two-fold higher death risk, i.e., adjusted death hazard ratio of 2.03 (95% CI: 1.76–2.33, p<0.001). Cubic spline survival models confirmed linear trends. The areas under the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free