American Cancer Society nutrition and physical activity guideline for cancer survivors

The overall 5-year relative survival rate for all cancers combined is now 68%, and there are over 16.9 million survivors in the United States. Evidence from laboratory and observational studies suggests that factors such as diet, physical activity, and obesity may affect risk for recurrence and overall survival after a cancer diagnosis. The purpose of this American Cancer Society guideline is to provide evidence-based, cancer-specific recommendations for anthropometric parameters, physical activity, diet, and alcohol intake for reducing recurrence and cancer-specific and overall mortality. The audiences for this guideline are health care providers caring for cancer survivors as well as cancer survivors and their families. The guideline is intended to serve as a resource for informing American Cancer Society programs, health policy, and the media. Sources of evidence that form the basis of this guideline are systematic literature reviews, meta-analyses, pooled analyses of cohort studies, and large randomized clinical trials published since 2012. Recommendations for nutrition and physical activity during cancer treatment, informed by current practice, large cancer care organizations, and reviews of other expert bodies, are also presented. To provide additional context for the guidelines, the authors also include information on the relationship between health-related behaviors and comorbidities, long-term sequelae and patient-reported outcomes, and health disparities, with attention to enabling survivors' ability to adhere to recommendations. Approaches to meet survivors' needs are addressed as well as clinical care coordination and resources for nutrition and physical activity counseling after a cancer diagnosis.     

Iron intake,oxidative stress-related genes and breast cancer risk

Iron has been suggested to contribute to breast cancer development through oxidative stress generation. Our study investigated associations between iron intake and breast cancer risk, overall and by menopausal and estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor (ER/PR) status, and modification by oxidative stress-related genetic polymorphisms (MnSOD, GSTM1 and GSTT1). A population-based case–control study (3,030 cases and 3,402 controls) was conducted in Ontario, Canada. Iron intake (total, dietary, supplemental, heme, nonheme) was assessed using a validated food frequency questionnaire. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated from multivariable logistic regression models. Interactions between iron intake and genotypes were assessed among 1,696 cases and 1,761 controls providing DNA. Overall, no associations were observed between iron intake and breast cancer risk. Among premenopausal women, total, dietary and dietary nonheme iron were positively associated with ER–/PR– breast cancer risk (all p_trend < 0.05). Among postmenopausal women, supplemental iron was associated with reduced breast cancer risk (OR_{>18 vs. 0 mg/day} = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.51–0.91), and dietary heme iron was associated with an increased risk, particularly the ER–/PR– subtype (OR_{highest vs. lowest quintile} = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.16–2.47; p_trend = 0.02). Furthermore, GSTT1 and combined GSTM1/GSTT1 polymorphisms modified some of the associations. For example, higher dietary iron was most strongly associated with increased breast cancer risk among women with GSTT1 deletion or GSTM1/GSTT1 double deletions (p_interaction < 0.05). Findings suggest that iron intake may have different effects on breast cancer risk according to menopausal and hormone receptor status, as well as genotypes affecting antioxidant capacity.     

Experiences and psychological distress of fertility treatment and employment

Purpose: This study examined experiences and psychological distress about fertility treatment in people combining work and treatment.

Methods: Five hundred and sixty-three participants in the UK completed an online survey asking about difficulties in combining work and treatment; workplace disclosure, support, absence and policy; and psychological distress about treatment.

Results: Absence from work and perceptions that treatment has an impact on work and career prospects were reported by the majority of participants and this was related to the psychological distress of treatment. Around three quarters of participants disclosed to their employer and colleagues. The key reason for disclosure was needing to ask for absence from work and the main reason for non-disclosure was privacy. Workplace policy relating to managing fertility treatment and support from colleagues and their employer was related to reduced psychological distress but workplace policy was reported by less than one quarter of participants.

Conclusion: Difficulties experienced in combining work and treatment suggest that support is needed. Specific workplace policy, guidance for supervisors and flexibility in fertility clinic times should help support employees during treatment and reduce psychological distress, thereby potentially influencing physical health and treatment outcomes.     

How does measurement of platelet P-selectin compare with other methods of measuring platelet function as a means of determining the effectiveness of antiplatelet therapy?

Measurement of P-selectin on activated platelets as a means of measuring platelet function utilizing the technology described here has the advantage of not requiring immediate access to specialist equipment and expertise. Blood samples are activated, fixed, stored, and transported to a central laboratory for flow cytometric analysis. Here we have compared P-selectin with other more traditional approaches to measuring platelet function in blood and/or platelet-rich plasma (PRP) from patients with acute coronary syndromes on treatment for at least 1 month with either aspirin and clopidogrel or aspirin with prasugrel. The comparators were light transmission aggregometry (LTA), VerifyNow and Multiplate aggregometry (for determining the effects of aspirin) and LTA, VerifyNow and Multiplate together with the BioCytex VASP phosphorylation assay (for the P2Y₁₂ antagonists). The P-selectin Aspirin Test revealed substantial inhibition of platelet function in all but three of 96 patients receiving aspirin with clopidogrel and in none of 51 patients receiving aspirin and prasugrel. The results were very similar to those obtained using LTA. There was only one patient with high residual platelet aggregation and low P-selectin expression. The same patients identified as “non-responders” to aspirin also presented with the highest residual platelet activity as measured using the VerifyNow system, although not quite as well separated from the other values. With the Multiplate test only one of these patients clearly stood out from the others. The results obtained using the P-selectin P2Y₁₂ Test in 102 patients taking aspirin and clopidogrel were similar to the more traditional approaches in that a wide scatter of results was obtained. Generally, high values seen with the P-selectin P2Y₁₂ Test were also high with the LTA, VerifyNow, Multiplate, and BioCytex VASP P2Y₁₂ Tests. Similarly, low residual platelet function using the P2Y₁₂ test was seen irrespective of the testing procedure used. However, there were differences in some patients. Prasugrel was always more effective than clopidogrel in inhibiting platelet function with none of 56 patients (P-selectin and VerifyNow), only 2 of 56 patients (Multiplate) and only 3 of 56 patients (Biocytex VASP) demonstrating high on-treatment residual platelet reactivity (HRPR) defined using previously published cut-off values. The exception was LTA where there were 11 of 56 patients with HRPR. It remains to be seen which experimental approach provides the most useful information regarding outcomes after adjusting therapies in treated patients.