Michael Bruneau1, Brandy-Joe Milliron2, Elizabeth Sinclair1, Elias Obeid3, Laura Gross4, Lisa Bealin4, Christa Smaltz4, Meghan Butryn5, Veda N Giri6. 1. Department of Health Sciences, College of Nursing and Health Professions, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 2. Department of Nutrition Sciences and Center for Family Intervention Science, College of Nursing and Health Professions, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 3. Department of Clinical Genetics, Temple-Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 4. Cancer Risk Assessment and Clinical Cancer Genetics Program, Departments of Medical Oncology, Cancer Biology, and Urology, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 5. Department of Psychology, College of Arts and Sciences, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 6. Cancer Risk Assessment and Clinical Cancer Genetics Program, Departments of Medical Oncology, Cancer Biology, and Urology, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Veda.Giri@jefferson.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Genetic counseling (GC) presents an opportunity to address modifiable cancer risk factors, such as obesity, which is impacted by non-adherence to physical activity (PA) guidelines. Adherence to PA guidelines has not been assessed among men undergoing GC for prostate cancer (PCA). We conducted a targeted analysis of men undergoing PCA GC to assess adherence to PA recommendations. METHODS: Using a cross-sectional design, a total of 158 men from the Genetic Evaluation of Men (GEM) study at two academic cancer centers with a diagnosis or at risk for PCA completed a structured lifestyle survey, including questions about the number of days and intensity of PA over the past year. One-sample t tests assessed adherence of participants to PA recommendations. Chi-square analyses compared differences in PA adherence by PCA status, aggressiveness, family history, and body mass index. Logistic regression analyses identified predictors of PA adherence. RESULTS: High proportions of GEM participants were overweight (44.9%) or obese (38.0%, p = 0.002). Men with PCA engaged in less moderate (p = 0.019) and vigorous (p = 0.005) aerobic activity than men without PCA. Higher education was predictive of adherence to light (p = 0.008), moderate (p = 0.019), and vigorous (p = 0.002) intensity PA. Older age (p = 0.015) and higher education (p = 0.001) were predictive of adherence to strength-based recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: High proportions of men receiving PCA GC were overweight/obese and lacked adherence to PA recommendations. GC represents a teachable moment to address PA to reduce cancer risk and promote cancer survivorship.
BACKGROUND: Genetic counseling (GC) presents an opportunity to address modifiable cancer risk factors, such as obesity, which is impacted by non-adherence to physical activity (PA) guidelines. Adherence to PA guidelines has not been assessed among men undergoing GC for prostate cancer (PCA). We conducted a targeted analysis of men undergoing PCA GC to assess adherence to PA recommendations. METHODS: Using a cross-sectional design, a total of 158 men from the Genetic Evaluation of Men (GEM) study at two academic cancer centers with a diagnosis or at risk for PCA completed a structured lifestyle survey, including questions about the number of days and intensity of PA over the past year. One-sample t tests assessed adherence of participants to PA recommendations. Chi-square analyses compared differences in PA adherence by PCA status, aggressiveness, family history, and body mass index. Logistic regression analyses identified predictors of PA adherence. RESULTS: High proportions of GEM participants were overweight (44.9%) or obese (38.0%, p = 0.002). Men with PCA engaged in less moderate (p = 0.019) and vigorous (p = 0.005) aerobic activity than men without PCA. Higher education was predictive of adherence to light (p = 0.008), moderate (p = 0.019), and vigorous (p = 0.002) intensity PA. Older age (p = 0.015) and higher education (p = 0.001) were predictive of adherence to strength-based recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: High proportions of men receiving PCA GC were overweight/obese and lacked adherence to PA recommendations. GC represents a teachable moment to address PA to reduce cancer risk and promote cancer survivorship.
Entities:
Keywords:
Genetic testing; Obesity; Physical activity; Prostate cancer
Authors: Veda N Giri; Sarah E Hegarty; Colette Hyatt; Erin O'Leary; John Garcia; Karen E Knudsen; William K Kelly; Leonard G Gomella Journal: Prostate Date: 2018-11-18 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Bronson D Riley; Julie O Culver; Cécile Skrzynia; Leigha A Senter; June A Peters; Josephine W Costalas; Faith Callif-Daley; Sherry C Grumet; Katherine S Hunt; Rebecca S Nagy; Wendy C McKinnon; Nancie M Petrucelli; Robin L Bennett; Angela M Trepanier Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2011-12-02 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Brandy-Joe Milliron; Michael Bruneau; Elias Obeid; Laura Gross; Lisa Bealin; Christa Smaltz; Veda N Giri Journal: Prostate Date: 2019-03-24 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Colin C Pritchard; Joaquin Mateo; Michael F Walsh; Navonil De Sarkar; Wassim Abida; Himisha Beltran; Andrea Garofalo; Roman Gulati; Suzanne Carreira; Rosalind Eeles; Olivier Elemento; Mark A Rubin; Dan Robinson; Robert Lonigro; Maha Hussain; Arul Chinnaiyan; Jake Vinson; Julie Filipenko; Levi Garraway; Mary-Ellen Taplin; Saud AlDubayan; G Celine Han; Mallory Beightol; Colm Morrissey; Belinda Nghiem; Heather H Cheng; Bruce Montgomery; Tom Walsh; Silvia Casadei; Michael Berger; Liying Zhang; Ahmet Zehir; Joseph Vijai; Howard I Scher; Charles Sawyers; Nikolaus Schultz; Philip W Kantoff; David Solit; Mark Robson; Eliezer M Van Allen; Kenneth Offit; Johann de Bono; Peter S Nelson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-07-06 Impact factor: 91.245