Does dietary counseling improve quality of life in cancer patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Results have been mixed as to whether dietary counseling improves clinical outcomes in cancer patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials assessed the effect of dietary counseling on quality of life (QOL). It included only randomized trials that focused on dietary counseling and that relied upon a standardized QOL measurement. Five trials that met these and all other a priori eligibility criteria were identified; they are the focus of this meta-analysis. When these five studies were examined in aggregate, the standardized mean difference in QOL scores among patients who received dietary counseling was 0.56 (95% confidence interval,-0.01-1.14; P = 0.06). Dietary counseling does not appear to improve QOL significantly in patients with cancer. However,an observed trend toward benefit underscores the need for further study.     

Body mass index and survival in women with breast cancer—systematic literature review and meta-analysis of 82 follow-up studies

BackgroundPositive association between obesity and survival after breast cancer was demonstrated in previous meta-analyses of published data, but only the results for the comparison of obese versus non-obese was summarised.MethodsWe systematically searched in MEDLINE and EMBASE for follow-up studies of breast cancer survivors with body mass index (BMI) before and after diagnosis, and total and cause-specific mortality until June 2013, as part of the World Cancer Research Fund Continuous Update Project. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to explore the magnitude and the shape of the associations.ResultsEighty-two studies, including 213 075 breast cancer survivors with 41 477 deaths (23 182 from breast cancer) were identified. For BMI before diagnosis, compared with normal weight women, the summary relative risks (RRs) of total mortality were 1.41 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29–1.53] for obese (BMI >30.0), 1.07 (95 CI 1.02–1.12) for overweight (BMI 25.0–<30.0) and 1.10 (95% CI 0.92–1.31) for underweight (BMI <18.5) women. For obese women, the summary RRs were 1.75 (95% CI 1.26–2.41) for pre-menopausal and 1.34 (95% CI 1.18–1.53) for post-menopausal breast cancer. For each 5 kg/m² increment of BMI before, <12 months after, and ≥12 months after diagnosis, increased risks of 17%, 11%, and 8% for total mortality, and 18%, 14%, and 29% for breast cancer mortality were observed, respectively.ConclusionsObesity is associated with poorer overall and breast cancer survival in pre- and post-menopausal breast cancer, regardless of when BMI is ascertained. Being overweight is also related to a higher risk of mortality. Randomised clinical trials are needed to test interventions for weight loss and maintenance on survival in women with breast cancer.     

Is preoperative physical activity level of patients undergoing cancer surgery associated with postoperative outcomes? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundThere is uncertainty about the role of preoperative physical activity (PA) level and its influence on postoperative outcomes, especially for patients undergoing cancer surgery.Aim: To investigate if the level of preoperative PA in patients undergoing cancer surgery is associated with postoperative complication rates, length of hospital stay (LOS) and quality of life (QOL).MethodsAn electronic search was performed from inception to 26th November 2017 in MEDLINE, Embase, AMED and CINAHL. Studies investigating the association between objective or subjective level of PA and postoperative complication rates, LOS and QOL were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. When possible, summary odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effect models.Results13 studies (5523 unique patients) were included. Overall, most studies were rated as having low or moderate risk of bias. Higher preoperative level of PA was not significantly associated with absence of postoperative complications (OR = 2.60; 95%CI = 0.59 to 11.37) but was significantly associated with shorter LOS (OR = 3.66; 95%CI = 1.38 to 9.6) and postoperative QOL (OR = 1.29; 95%CI = 1.11 to 1.49).ConclusionsThe available literature suggests higher levels of preoperative PA in patients undergoing cancer surgery may be associated with better postoperative outcomes, particularly shorter LOS and better QOL. There is a need for high-quality studies investigating the association between preoperative PA and postoperative outcomes.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO 2017 CRD42017082334. Available from:http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017082334.     

What is the optimal systemic treatment of men with metastatic,hormone-naive prostate cancer? A STOPCAP systematic review and network meta-analysis

BackgroundOur prior Systemic Treatment Options for Cancer of the Prostate systematic reviews showed improved survival for men with metastatic hormone-naive prostate cancer when abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone/prednisone (AAP) or docetaxel (Doc), but not zoledronic acid (ZA), were added to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT). Trial evidence also suggests a benefit of combining celecoxib (Cel) with ZA and ADT. To establish the optimal treatments, a network meta-analysis (NMA) was carried out based on aggregate data (AD) from all available studies.MethodsOverall survival (OS) and failure-free survival data from completed Systemic Treatment Options for Cancer of the Prostate reviews of Doc, ZA and AAP and from recent trials of ZA and Cel contributed to this comprehensive AD-NMA. The primary outcome was OS. Correlations between treatment comparisons within one multi-arm, multi-stage trial were estimated from control-arm event counts. Network consistency and a common heterogeneity variance were assumed.ResultsWe identified 10 completed trials which had closed to recruitment, and one trial in which recruitment was ongoing, as eligible for inclusion. Results are based on six trials including 6204 men (97% of men randomised in all completed trials). Network estimates of effects on OS were consistent with reported comparisons with ADT alone for AAP [hazard ration (HR) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53–0.71], Doc (HR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.68–0.87), ZA + Cel (HR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.62–0.97), ZA + Doc (HR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.66–0.94), Cel (HR = 0.94 95% CI 0.75–1.17) and ZA (HR = 0.90 95% CI 0.79–1.03). The effect of ZA + Cel is consistent with the additive effects of the individual treatments. Results suggest that AAP has the highest probability of being the most effective treatment both for OS (94% probability) and failure-free survival (100% probability). Doc was the second-best treatment of OS (35% probability).ConclusionsUniquely, we have included all available results and appropriately accounted for inclusion of multi-arm, multi-stage trials in this AD-NMA. Our results support the use of AAP or Doc with ADT in men with metastatic hormone-naive prostate cancer. AAP appears to be the most effective treatment, but it is not clear to what extent and whether this is due to a true increased benefit with AAP or the variable features of the individual trials. To fully account for patient variability across trials, changes in prognosis or treatment effects over time and the potential impact of treatment on progression, a network meta-analysis based on individual participant data is in development.     

Associations of circulating and dietary vitamin D with prostate cancer risk: a systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis

Objective  

We systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed literature examining associations of vitamin D (dietary intake, circulating 25-hydroxy-vitamin-D (25(OH)D), and 1,25-dihydroxy-vitamin-D (1,25(OH)₂D) concentrations) with prostate cancer.     

Do we need to routinely perform cavity shaving with breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis

AimsTo evaluate comparative outcomes of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) of breast cancer with and without cavity shaving.MethodsA systematic search of multiple electronic data sources was conducted, and all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing BCS with or without cavity shaving for breast cancer were included. Positive margin rate, second operation rate, operative time, post-operative haematoma, cosmetic appearance and budget cost were the evaluated outcome parameters for the meta-analysis.ResultsSix RCTs reporting a total number of 971 patients; 495 of these underwent BCS plus shaving (BCS + S), and 473 underwent BCS alone were included. BCS + S showed significantly lower positive margin rate (Risk Ratio [RR] 0.40, P = 0.00001) and second operation rate (RR 0.38, P = 0.00001). BCS + S demonstrated longer operative time than BCS (79 ± 4 min vs 67 ± 3 min, Mean Difference 12.14, P = 0.002), and there was no significant difference in the risk of post-operative haematoma (RR 0.33, P = 0.20).ConclusionBCS + S is superior to BCS in terms of positive margins rate and second operation rate. Operative time is longer when cavity shaving is performed.     

How do women who are informed that they are at increased risk of breast cancer appraise their risk? A systematic review of qualitative research

This review aimed to synthesise qualitative research on how women notified that they are at increased risk of breast cancer view their risk. Five electronic databases were systematically reviewed for qualitative research investigating how women who have received an increased breast cancer risk estimate appraise their risk status. Fourteen records reporting 12 studies were included and critically appraised. Data were thematically synthesised. Four analytical themes were generated. Women appraise their risk of breast cancer through comparison with their risk of other familial diseases. Clinically derived risk estimates were understood in relation to pre-conceived risk appraisals, with incongruences met with surprise. Family history is relied upon strongly, with women exploring similarities and differences in attributes between themselves and affected relatives to gauge the likelihood of diagnosis. Women at increased risk reported living under a cloud of inevitability or uncertainty regarding diagnosis, resulting in concerns about risk management. Women hold stable appraisals of their breast cancer risk which appear to be mainly formed through their experiences of breast cancer in the family. Healthcare professionals should explore women’s personal risk appraisals prior to providing clinically derived risk estimates in order to address misconceptions, reduce concerns about inevitability and increase perceived control over risk reduction.Subject terms: Breast cancer, Risk factors, Disease prevention, Patient education     

Is adherence to diet,physical activity,and body weight cancer prevention recommendations associated with colorectal cancer incidence in African American women?

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether adherence to the World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) cancer prevention recommendations was associated with colorectal cancer incidence in the Black Women’s Health Study (BWHS).

Methods

In this ongoing prospective cohort of African American women (analytic cohort n = 49,103), 354 incident colorectal cancers were diagnosed between baseline (1995) and 2011. Adherence scores for seven WCRF/AICR recommendations (adherent = 1 point, non-adherent level 1 = 0.5 points, non-adherent level 2 = 0 points) were created using questionnaire data and summed to an overall adherence score (maximum = 7). Recommendation adherence and colorectal cancer incidence were evaluated using baseline and time-varying data in Cox regression models.

Results

At baseline, 8.5 % of women adhered >4 recommendations. In time-varying analyses, the HR was 0.98 (95 % CI 0.84–1.15) per 0.5 point higher score and 0.51 (95 % CI 0.23–1.10) for adherence to >4 compared to <3 recommendations. Adherence to individual recommendations was not associated with colorectal cancer risk. Results were similar in models that considered baseline exposures only.

Conclusions

Adherence to cancer prevention recommendations was low and not associated with colorectal cancer risk among women in the BWHS. Research in diverse populations is essential to evaluate the validity of existing recommendations, and assess whether there are alternative recommendations that are more beneficial for cancer prevention in specific populations.

     

Can early implementation of salvage radiotherapy for prostate cancer improve the therapeutic ratio? A systematic review and regression meta-analysis with radiobiological modelling

PurposeFor prostate cancer that is thought to be locally recurrent after prostatectomy, the optimal timing, dose and techniques for salvage radiotherapy (SRT) have not been established. Here we perform a systematic review of published reports including regression meta-analysis and radiobiologic modelling to identify predictors of biochemical disease control and late toxicity.MethodsWe performed a review of published series reporting treatment outcomes following SRT. Studies with at least 30 patients, median PSA before SRT of less than 2.0 ng/mL, and median follow-up of greater than 36 months were identified. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to test Gleason Score, SRT dose, SRT timing, pre-SRT PSA, whole pelvic irradiation and androgen deprivation therapy as predictors of 5-year biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) and severe (grade ⩾ 3) late GI and GU toxicity. bPFS and toxicity data were fit to tumour control probability and normal tissue complication probability models, respectively.ResultsTwenty-five articles met the inclusion criteria for this analysis. Five-year bPFS ranged from 25% to 70%. Severe late GI toxicity rates were 0% to 9%, and severe late GU toxicity rates were 1–11%. On multivariate analysis, bPFS increased with SRT dose by 2.5% per Gy and decreased with pre-SRT PSA by 18.3% per ng/mL (p < 0.001). Late GI and GU toxicity increased with SRT dose by 1.2% per Gy (p = 0.012) and 0.7% per Gy (p = 0.010), respectively. Radiobiological models demonstrate the interaction between pre-SRT PSA, SRT dose and bPFS. For example, an increase in pre-SRT PSA from 0.4 to 1.0 ng/mL increases the SRT dose required to achieve a 50% bPFS rate from 60 to 70 Gy. This could increase the rate of severe late toxicity by approximately 10%.ConclusionBiochemical control rates following SRT increase with SRT dose and decrease with pre-SRT PSA. Severe late GI and GU toxicity rates also increase with SRT dose. Radiobiological models suggest that the therapeutic ratio of SRT may be improved by initiating treatment at low PSA levels.     

Should de-escalation of bone-targeting agents be standard of care for patients with bone metastases from breast cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundDe-escalation of bone-targeted agents, such as bisphosphonates and denosumab, from 4- to 12-weekly dosing is an increasingly used strategy in patients with bone metastases from breast cancer. It is unclear whether there is sufficient evidence to support de-escalation as a standard of care.MethodsA systematic review of randomized trials comparing standard 4-weekly administration of bone-targeted agents with de-escalated (Q12-weekly) dosing in breast cancer patients was carried out. Medline, PubMed and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception until November 2014 for relevant studies. Outcomes of interest included skeletal-related event (SRE) rates, bone pain, adverse events (AEs) and bone turnover biomarkers. Random-effects meta-analyses were carried out.ResultsA total of nine citations representing seven unique studies were eligible. One study is ongoing with no reported data. Six studies reported data for at least one outcome of interest. Data were available comparing standard versus de-escalated therapy for pamidronate (1 study, 38 patients), zoledronate (3 studies, 1117 patients) and denosumab (2 studies, 284 patients). Meta-analysis of five trials reporting data for on-study SRE rates between standard (61/443 patients) and de-escalated (49/392 patients) arms produced a summary risk ratio of 0.90 (95% confidence interval 0.63–1.29). Meta-analyses of data for AEs and bone turnover biomarkers also showed no statistically significant differences between standard and de-escalated arms, though only limited numbers of patients and events were present for most analyses.ConclusionIn this systematic review of studies of bisphosphonates and denosumab, there appears to be no difference in SREs or pain with de-escalated therapy. While a large, hopefully definitive study is ongoing, the data presented so far are consistent with de-escalation of bone-targeting agents becoming a standard of care for patients with bone metastases from breast cancer.     

Letter to the editor regarding: ‘Association between BRCA mutational status and survival in patients with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis’

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment -     

Associations of objectively assessed physical activity and sedentary time with biomarkers of breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women: findings from NHANES (2003–2006)

Physical activity reduces the risk of postmenopausal breast cancer through multiple inter-related biologic mechanisms; sedentary time may contribute additionally to this risk. We examined cross-sectional associations of objectively assessed physical activity and sedentary time with established biomarkers of breast cancer risk in a population-based sample of postmenopausal women. Accelerometer, anthropometric and laboratory data were available for 1,024 (n = 443 fasting) postmenopausal women in the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2003–2006. Associations of quartiles of the accelerometer variables (moderate- to vigorous-intensity activity, light-intensity activity and sedentary time per day; average length of active and sedentary bouts) with the continuous biomarkers were assessed using linear regression models. Following adjustment for potential confounders, including sedentary time, moderate- to vigorous-intensity activity had significant (P < 0.05), inverse associations with all biomarker outcomes (body mass index, waist circumference, C-reactive protein, fasting plasma glucose, fasting insulin and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance). Light-intensity activity and sedentary time were significantly associated in fully adjusted models with all biomarkers except fasting glucose. Active bout length was associated with a smaller waist circumference and lower C-reactive protein levels, while sedentary bout length was associated with a higher BMI. The associations of objectively assessed moderate- to vigorous-intensity activity with breast cancer biomarkers are consistent with the established beneficial effects of self-reported exercise on breast cancer risk. Our findings further suggest that light-intensity activity may have a protective effect, and that sedentary time may independently contribute to breast cancer risk.     

Prognostic value of baseline serum HER2 extracellular domain level with a cut-off value of 15 ng/mL in patients with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

To investigate the clinical utility of molecular breast imaging (MBI) in patients with proven invasive breast cancer scheduled for breast-conserving surgery (BCS).

Methods

Following approval by the institutional review board and written informed consent, records of patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer scheduled for BCS who had undergone MBI for local staging in the period from March 2012 till December 2014 were retrospectively reviewed.

Results

A total of 287 women (aged 30–88 years) were evaluated. MBI showed T stage migration in 26 patients (9%), with frequent detection of in situ carcinoma around the tumor. Surgical management was adjusted in 14 of these patients (54%). In 17 of 287 patients (6%), MBI revealed 21 proven additional lesions in the ipsilateral, contralateral breast or both. In 18 of these additional foci (86%), detected in 15 patients, malignancy was found. Thirteen of these 15 patients had ipsilateral cancer and 2 patients bilateral malignancy. In total, MBI revealed a larger tumor extent, additional tumor foci or both in 40 patients (14%), leading to treatment adjustment in 25 patients (9%).

Conclusion

MBI seems to be a useful imaging modality with a high predictive value in revealing ipsilateral and bilateral disease not visualized by mammography and ultrasound. It may play an important role in delineating the extent of the index lesion during preoperative planning. Incorporation of MBI in the clinical work-up as an adjunct modality to mammography and ultrasound may lead to better selection of patients who could benefit from BCS.