| Literature DB >> 27284267 |
Anna L Beavis1, Anna Jo Bodurtha Smith2, Amanda Nickles Fader1.
Abstract
Modifiable lifestyle factors, such as obesity, lack of physical activity, and smoking, contribute greatly to cancer and chronic disease morbidity and mortality worldwide. This review appraises recent evidence on modifiable lifestyle factors in the prevention of endometrial cancer (EC) and ovarian cancer (OC) as well as new evidence for lifestyle management of EC and OC survivors. For EC, obesity continues to be the strongest risk factor, while new evidence suggests that physical activity, oral contraceptive pills, and bariatric surgery may be protective against EC. Other medications, such as metformin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, may be protective, and interventional research is ongoing. For OC, we find increasing evidence to support the hypothesis that obesity and hormone replacement therapy increase the risk of developing OC. Oral contraceptive pills are protective against OC but are underutilized. Dietary factors such as the Mediterranean diet and alcohol consumption do not seem to affect the risk of either OC or EC. For EC and OC survivors, physical activity and weight loss are associated with improved quality of life. Small interventional trials show promise in increasing physical activity and weight maintenance for EC and OC survivors, although the impact on long-term health, including cancer recurrence and overall mortality, is unknown. Women's health providers should integrate counseling about these modifiable lifestyle factors into both the discussion of prevention for all women and the management of survivors of gynecologic cancers.Entities:
Keywords: endometrial cancer; gynecologic cancer; lifestyle; obesity; ovarian cancer; prevention
Year: 2016 PMID: 27284267 PMCID: PMC4883806 DOI: 10.2147/IJWH.S88367
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Womens Health ISSN: 1179-1411
American Cancer Society recommendations for cancer prevention and survivorship
| Cancer prevention | Cancer survivorship | |
|---|---|---|
| Physical activity | Adopt a physically active lifestyle | Adopt a physically active lifestyle |
| Weight management | Achieve and maintain a healthy weight throughout life | Achieve and maintain a healthy weight |
| Diet | Consume a healthy diet, with an emphasis on plant foods | Consume a healthy diet |
Summary of recent meta-analyses on endometrial cancer prevention
| Direction of risk | Relative risk (95% CI) | Studies included | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Obesity (BMI >30) | ↑ | 2.54 (2.11–3.06) | 7 cohort, 11 case–control |
| Physical activity | ↓ | 0.77 (0.70–0.85) | 7 cohort |
| Dairy intake | No effect | 0.97 (0.93–1.01) | 1 cohort, 8 case–control |
| Coffee intake | ↓ | 0.8 (0.74–0.86) | 13 cohort |
| Tea intake | No effect | Green tea: 0.78 (0.66–0.92) | Green tea: 1 cohort, 5 case–control |
| Black tea: 0.99 (0.79–1.23) | Black tea: 5 cohort, 4 case–control | ||
| Red meat intake | ↑ | 1.51 (1.19–1.93) | 7 case–control |
| Alcohol intake | No effect | 0.83 (0.59–1.18) (cohort analysis) | 6 cohort, 14 case–control |
| 0.89 (0.76–1.05) (case–control analysis) | |||
| Smoking | ↓ | 0.81 (0.74–0.88) | 10 cohort, 24 case–control |
| 0.72 (0.66–0.79) | |||
| Breastfeeding | ↓ | 0.77 (0.62–0.96) | 14 cohort |
| Bariatric surgery | ↓ | 0.4 (0.2–0.79) | 3 cohort |
| Oral contraceptive pills | ↓ | 0.69 (0.66–0.73) | 15 cohort, 21 case–control |
| Levonorgestrel intrauterine device | ↓ | 0.69 (0.58–0.82) | 4 cohort, 14 case–control |
| Estrogen-only HRT | ↑ | 2.3 (2.1–2.5) | 10 cohort, 27 case–control |
| Combined estrogen–progesterone HRT | ↓ | 0.4 (0.2–0.6) | 1 RCT, 3 cohort, 3 case–control |
| Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs | ↓ | Overall: 0.87 (0.79–0.96) | 4 cohort, 5 case–control |
| Obese: 0.72 (0.58–0.90) | |||
| Nonobese: 1.08 (0.82–1.43) |
Notes:
Significant at P<0.05.
Odds ratio shown, per serving of dairy per day.
99% CI given.
Odds ratio shown.
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; BMI, body mass index; RCT, randomized controlled trial; HRT, hormone replacement therapy.
Lifestyle interventions in survivors of endometrial cancer
| Study design | Intervention | Results
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adherence, % | Weight change, physical activity, diet | Quality of life | |||
| Survivors of Uterine Cancer | RCT | Intervention: education and counseling with 10 weekly and 6 bi-weekly sessions followed by 6 additional months of contact with registered dietician | 84 | Weight change (difference between intervention and comparison): 4.6 kg loss ( | Physical functioning: significant improvement at 6 months ( |
| Donnelly et al | RCT | Intervention: behavior change, moderate intensity physical activity | 88 | Body composition: NS | Fatigue: significant improvement post-intervention ( |
| Uncontrolled pre–post | Intervention: three in-person counseling visits, diet, lifestyle, and exercise counseling through the | 70 | Weight change: 2.3 kg loss ( | QoL: NS | |
| Steps to Health | Uncontrolled pre–post | Intervention: individualized exercise plan developed from initial laboratory assessment, home-based exercise with daily exercise diary and accelerometer, telephone counseling at weekly to monthly intervals | NR | Physical activity: 9 min/d increase ( | Physical functioning: significant improvement ( |
| Revving-up Exercise for SustainedWeight Loss by Altering NeurologicReward and Drive (REWARD trial)Nock et al | RCT | Intervention: “assisted” rate exercise, 3×/wk – mechanical assistance to adjusts participants’ heart rate to a goal | Currently recruiting patients | ||
Abbreviations: RCT, randomized controlled trial; EC, endometrial cancer; NS, nonsignificant; QoL, quality of life; NR, not reported; fMRI, functional magnetic resonance imaging; wk, week; App, application.
Summary of recent meta-analyses on ovarian cancer prevention
| Direction of risk | Relative risk (95% CI) | Studies included | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Obesity (BMI >30) | ↑ | 1.13 (1.06–1.20) | 17 cohort, 30 case–control |
| Physical activity | No effect | 0.92 (0.84–1.00) | 9 cohort, 10 case–control |
| Vegetable intake | ↓ | 0.89 (0.81–0.99) | 4 cohort, 4 case–control |
| Dairy intake | No effect | 0.925 (0.78–1.09) | 19 case–control |
| Fish intake | No effect | 1.04 (0.89–1.22) (cohort analysis) | 5 cohort, 10 case–control |
| 0.90 (0.73–1.12) (case–control analysis) | |||
| Coffee intake | No effect | 1.05 (0.75–1.46) | 7 case–control |
| Tea intake | No effect | 1.07 (0.78–1.45) | 6 case–control |
| Alcohol intake | No effect | 1.03 (0.96–1.10) | 13 cohort |
| Smoking | ↑ | 1.07 (1.03–1.10) | 19 cohort, 21 case–control |
| Breastfeeding | ↓ | 0.76 (0.69–0.83) | 5 cohort, 35 case–control |
| Tubal ligation | ↓ | 0.7 (0.64–0.75) | 7 cohort, 23 case–control |
| Oral contraceptive pills | ↓ | 0.73 (0.70–0.76) | 13 cohort, 32 case–control |
| Hormone replacement therapy (estrogen only and combined) | ↑ | 1.14 (1.10–1.19) | 17 cohort, 35 case–control |
| Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs | No effect | Aspirin: 0.91 (0.84–0.99) | 12 case–control |
| NSAIDs: 0.90 (0.77–1.05) | |||
| Acetaminophen: 0.99 (0.88–1.12) | |||
Notes:
Significant at P<0.05.
99% CI given.
Odds ratio shown is for 13 studies of low-fat/skimmed milk as dairy studies were analyzed by main type of dairy.
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; BMI, body mass index; NSAID, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug.
Lifestyle interventions in survivors of OC
| Study design | Intervention | Results
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adherence, % | Weight change, physical activity, diet | Quality of life | |||
| Ovarian Nutrition Education (ONE) study | RCT | Intervention: weekly to monthly telephone calls with dietitian advising diet with ≥5 vegetable servings/d, 16 ounces of vegetable juice/d, ≥3 fruit servings/d, ≥30 grams of fiber, and ≤20% energy from fat | 11–33 | Weight: NS | QoL: NS |
| Moonsammy et al | Controlled pre–post | Intervention: individualized home-based exercise program and equipment (stability ball, yoga mat, resistance bands), biweekly telephone-based cognitive behavior therapy | NR | Body composition: significant increase in body fat ( | QoL: NS |
| Hwang et al | Controlled pre–post | Intervention: 1-hour weekly health education and support group, home exercise (three 60-min sessions/wk), relaxation therapy (three 15-min sessions/wk) for 8 weeks | 92 | Distance walked: significant improvement ( | QoL: significant improvement ( |
| von Gruenigen et al | Uncontrolled pre–post | Intervention: 30-minute dietary and exercise counseling at each chemotherapy session, pedometer | 92 | Physical activity: NS | QoL: significant improvement ( |
| Newton et al | Uncontrolled pre–post | Intervention: educational booklet, individualized weekly walking prescription, weekly counseling with exercise physiologist (in-person or by phone, depending on participant distance from hospital) | 76 | Physical functioning (measured with a 6-minute walk test): significant improvement ( | Physical well-being: significant improvement ( |
| Mizrahi et al | Uncontrolled pre–post | Intervention: individualized 90 min/wk prescribed exercise, weekly telephone call | 81 | BMI: NS | QoL: significant improvement ( |
| Lifestyle Interventionfor oVarian cancer | 1,070 women | Intervention: in-person diet counseling, telephone counseling (twice a week to bimonthly), exercise diaries | Currently recruiting patients | ||
Abbreviations: RCT, randomized controlled trial; OC, ovarian cancer; NS, nonsignificant; QoL, quality of life; NR, not reported; HR, hazard ratio; BMI, body mass index; MET, metabolic equivalent of task; wk, week.