| Literature DB >> 33126617 |
Letícia L D Santos1, Isis D D Custódio2, Alinne T F Silva1, Izabella C C Ferreira1, Eduarda C Marinho2, Douglas C Caixeta3, Adriele V Souza3, Renata R Teixeira3, Thaise G Araújo1, Nitin Shivappa4,5,6, James R Hébert4,5,6, Carlos Eduardo Paiva7, Foued S Espíndola2,3, Luiz Ricardo Goulart1,2, Yara C P Maia1,2.
Abstract
Chronic inflammation and redox imbalance are strongly influenced by diet and nutritional status, and both are risk factors for tumor development. This prospective study aimed to explore the associations between inflammatory and antioxidant markers and nutritional status in women with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy. The women were evaluated at three times: T0, after the infusion of the first cycle; T1, after infusion of the intermediate cycle; and T2, after the infusion of the last chemotherapy cycle. The consumption of antioxidant nutrients and the Total Dietary Antioxidant Capacity reduced between T0 and T2 and the Dietary Inflammatory Index scores increased throughout the chemotherapy. Blood samples taken at the end of the chemotherapy showed lower levels of glutathione reductase and reduced glutathione, with greater quantification of the transcripts for Interleukin-6 and Tumor Necrosis Factor α. It should be emphasized that the Total Dietary Antioxidant Capacity is lower and the Dietary Inflammatory Index is higher in the group of overweight patients at the end of the follow-up, besides showing lower levels of the redox status, especially the plasma levels of glutathione reductase (p = 0.039). In addition, trends towards higher transcriptional levels of cytokines in peripheral blood were observed more often in overweight women than in non-overweight women. In this study of 55 women with breast cancer, nine (16%) with metastases, diet became more pro-inflammatory with fewer antioxidants during the chemotherapy. Briefly, we have shown that chemotherapy is critical for high-risk overweight women due to their reduced intake of antioxidant nutrients, generating greater inflammatory and oxidative stress profiles, suggesting the adoption of healthier dietary practices by women with breast cancer throughout their chemotherapy.Entities:
Keywords: breast cancer; chronic inflammation; dietary inflammatory index; dietary total antioxidant capacity; oxidative stress; plasma biomarkers
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33126617 PMCID: PMC7692181 DOI: 10.3390/nu12113303
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Diagram reporting the number of women with breast cancer screened, approached and recruited during a study at a university hospital in Uberlândia, Minas Gerais, Brazil, 2014–2015 (n = 55).
Clinical, hormonal and therapeutic characteristics of women with breast cancer (n = 55).
| Characteristics | |
|---|---|
|
| 51.5 (29–66 ± 10.1) |
|
| |
| Single | 9 (16.4) |
| Married | 27 (49) |
| Widow | 7 (12.7) |
| Divorced/Separated | 6 (10.9) |
| Other | 6 (10.9) |
|
| |
| <8 years | 18 (32.7) |
| 8 to 11 years | 24 (43.6) |
| >11 years | 12 (21.8) |
| NR | 1 (1.8) |
|
| |
| No | 21 (38.1) |
| Yes | 34 (61.8) |
|
| |
| Ductal carcinoma | 53 (96.4) |
| Lobular carcinoma | 2 (3.6) |
|
| |
| 0 | 1 (1.8) |
| IA | 10 (18.1) |
| IIA | 12 (21.8) |
| IIB | 14 (25.4) |
| IIIA | 6 (10.9) |
| IIIB | 8 (14.5) |
| IV | 1 (1.8) |
| NR | 3 (5.4) |
|
| |
| G1 | 7 (12.7) |
| G2 | 32 (58.2) |
| G3 | 12 (21.8) |
| NR | 4 (7.3) |
|
| |
| ER−, PR−, HER2− and CK5/6+ and/or EGFR+ | 11 (20) |
| ER−, PR− and HER2+ | 7 (12.7) |
| ER+ and/or PR+, HER2− and Ki-67 < 14% | 14 (25.4) |
| ER+ and/or PR+, HER2− and Ki-67 ≥ 14% | 18 (32.7) |
| ER+ and/or PR+, HER2+ | 5 (9.1) |
|
| |
| No | 48 (87.3) |
| Yes | 7 (12.7) |
|
| |
| Radical Mastectomy | 7 (12.7) |
| Conservative Surgery | 25 (45.4) |
| Others | 23 (41.8) |
|
| |
| AC → Docetaxel (T) | 33 (60) |
| AC → Paclitaxel (P) | 8 (14.5) |
| FAC | 9 (16.4) |
| CMF | 5 (9.1) |
SD, standard deviation; G1, well-differentiated tumor (low grade); G2, moderately differentiated tumor (intermediate grade); G3, poorly differentiated tumor (high degree); ER, estrogen receptor; PR, progesterone receptor; HER2, human epidermal growth factor type 2 receptor; −, negative; + positive; CK, cytokeratin; EGFR, human epidermal growth factor receptor; Ki 67, Ki 67 antigen; NR, not registered; AC, Adriamycin + cyclophosphamide; FAC, 5-fluoracil, Adriamycin and cyclophosphamide; CMF, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil.
Nutritional status of women with breast cancer on chemotherapy at a university hospital in Uberlândia, MG, Brazil, 2014–2015 (n = 55).
| Nutritional Status | Age Group | T0 | T1 | T2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| % |
| % |
| % | ||
| Low weight | 29–59 | 1 | 1.8 | 1 | 1.8 | 0 | 0.0 |
| 60–66 | 2 | 3.6 | 2 | 3.6 | 2 | 3.6 | |
| Eutrophy | 29–59 | 12 | 21.8 | 12 | 21.8 | 13 | 23.6 |
| 60–66 | 9 | 16.4 | 9 | 16.4 | 10 | 18.2 | |
| Overweight | 29–59 | 9 | 16.4 | 9 | 16.4 | 10 | 18.2 |
| 60–66 | 7 | 12.7 | 7 | 12.7 | 6 | 10.9 | |
| Grade I obesity | 29–59 | 6 | 10.9 | 7 | 12.7 | 6 | 10.9 |
| Grade II obesity | 29–59 | 6 | 10.9 | 5 | 9.1 | 5 | 9.1 |
| Grade III obesity | 29–59 | 3 | 5.5 | 3 | 5.5 | 3 | 5.5 |
T0, Period after the first chemotherapy cycle; T1, Period after intermediate chemotherapy cycle; T2, Period after the last chemotherapy cycle.
Nutritional antioxidant profile of women with breast cancer on chemotherapy at a university hospital in Uberlândia, MG, Brazil, 2014–2015 (n = 55).
| Antioxidant Nutrients | T0 | T1 | T2 |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | Median | Mean ± SD | Median | Mean ± SD | Median | ||
| Vitamin A (UI) | 8521.6 ± 3932.9 | 7933.8 (5816.7–10280.3) a | 9791.7 ± 6248.8 | 7379.7 (5698.8–11217.7) a | 7517.5 ± 4550.8 | 6048.6 (4737.2–9799.5) b | 0.004 ᶷ |
| Beta-carotene (mcg) | 4673.1 ± 1840.5 | 4552.7 (3340.0–5710.6) a | 4893.2 ± 3259.9 | 3852.0 (2903.4–5920.4) a | 3571.4 ± 2184.3 | 3050.8 (2285.8–4282.7) b | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Vitamin D (mcg) | 5.9 ± 4.0 | 4.8 (3.4–6.7) a | 4.1 ± 2.6 | 3.4 (2.0–5.0) b | 3.7 ± 2.4 | 3.1 (1.8–4.9) b | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Vitamin C (mg) | 130.3 ± 66.6 | 119.5 (83.8–159.2) a | 141.1 ± 66.8 | 123.5 (88.2–192.1) a | 80.4 ± 41.4 | 69.7 (51.2–101.2) b | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Magnesium (mg) | 216.4 ± 36.3 | 208.5 (191.6–227.6) a | 183.9 ± 35.9 | 175.2 (156.5–202.5) b | 179.0 ± 38.0 | 170.2 (156.6–195.2) b | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Iron (mg) | 10.3 ± 1.2 | 10.3 (9.3–11.0) a | 8.9 ± 1.5 | 8.9 (8.1–9.7) b | 9.0 ± 1.5 | 9.0 (7.8–9.9) b | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Zinc (mg) | 8.2 ± 1.2 a | 8.0 (7.3–8.7) | 7.7 ± 1.2 b | 7.7 (6.5–8.5) | 7.4 ± 1.5 b | 7.3 (6.5–8.4) | 0.009 ᶿ |
| Selenium (mcg) | 108.9 ± 55.6 | 96.1 (86.8–112.6) a | 93.2 ± 23.5 | 89.1 (77.1–103.8) b | 85.4 ± 12.2 | 85.7 (76.4–93.2) b | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Omega-6 (g) | 10.1 ± 1.4 | 10.2 (9.1–11.1) a | 9.2 ± 1.5 | 8.9 (8.0–10.2) b | 8.8 ± 1.1 | 8.6 (8.1–9.8) b | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Omega-3 (g) | 1.8 ± 0.3 | 1.7 (1.5–1.9) a | 1.3 ± 0.3 | 1.3 (1.2–1.4) b | 1.4 ± 0.3 | 1.4 (1.2–1.5) b | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Isoflavones (mg) | 0.9 ± 0.7 | 0.7 (0.5–1.1) a | 1.8 ± 5.2 | 0.7 (0.3–1.1) a | 0.2 ± 0.1 | 0.2 (0.1–0.3) b | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Copper (mg) | 1.2 ± 0.6 | 1.0 (0.9–1.3) a,b | 1.2 ± 0.5 | 1.1 (0.9–1.4) a | 1.2 ± 1.2 | 0.8 (0.7–1.3) b | 0.02 ᶷ |
| Glutamic Acid (g) | 11.0 ± 0.7 | 11.0 (10.7–11.3) a | 9.9 ± 1.3 | 10.0 (9.0–10.5) b | 10.2 ± 1.1 | 10.3 (9.4–10.8) b | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Glycine (g) | 2.8 ± 0.1 | 2.9 (2.7–2.9) a | 2.5 ± 0.4 | 2.5 (2.2–2.8) b | 2.5 ± 0.5 | 2.4 (2.1–2.8) b | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Lutein + Zeaxanthin (mcg) | 5300.6 ± 3376.6 | 4519.8 (3325.3–5609.5) a | 2078.1 ± 1746.5 | 1769.1 (954.7–2222.1) b | 3835.1 ± 2854.2 | 3170.8 (1850.5–4776.2) c | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Manganese (mg) | 8.0 ± 4.6 | 6.9 (4.9–9.1) a | 17.1 ± 19.1 | 12.6 (6.6–19.3) b | 8.9 ± 19.1 | 4.2 (2.3–7.0) c | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Daidzein (mg) | 0.4 ± 0.6 | 0.2 (0.1–0.4) a | 0.4 ± 0.9 | 0.1 (0.1–0.3) b | 0.07 ± 0.03 | 0.07 (0.05–0.09) c | <0.001 ᶷ |
| Genistein (mg) | 0.3 ± 0.3 | 0.2 (0.1–0.4) a | 2.4 ± 11.8 | 0.1 (0.1–0.5) a | 0.04 ± 0.02 | 0.04 (0.03–0.05) b | <0.001 ᶷ |
| TACd without coffee (escore) | 7.4 ± 9.9 | 4.1 (2.6–7.6) a | 7.7 ± 10.9 | 4.1 (2.7–7.7) a.b | 4.4 ± 4.9 | 2.8 (1.8–5.2) b | 0.019 ᶷ |
SD, standard deviation; T0, Period after the first chemotherapy cycle; T1, Period after intermediate chemotherapy cycle; T2, Period after the last chemotherapy cycle.; TACd, Total Dietary Antioxidant Capacity; ᶿ One-way ANOVA with repeated measurements + Sidak test; ᶷ Friedman + Multiple Comparison Test; Horizontal means/medians followed by different letters differed statistically according to the post-hoc test at the 5% probability level.
Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) by time of chemotherapy of women with breast cancer at a university hospital in Uberlândia, MG, Brazil, 2014–2015 (n = 55).
| DII | T0 | T1 | T2 |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | Median | Mean ± SD | Median | Mean ± SD | Median | ||
| Score DII | 0.04 ± 1.16 | 0.14 | 0.79 ± 1.08 | 0.86 | 1.78 ± 1.02 | 1.89 | <0.001 ᶷ |
DII, Dietary Inflammatory Index; SD, standard deviation; T0, Period after the first chemotherapy cycle; T1, Period after intermediate chemotherapy cycle; T2, Period after the last chemotherapy cycle; ᶷ Friedman + Multiple Comparison Test; Horizontal means/medians followed by different letters differed statistically according to the post-hoc test at the 5% probability level.
Association between levels of redox status markers and transcriptional levels of inflammatory markers in women with breast cancer at the end of chemotherapy (T2).
| Dependent Variables | Higher vs. Lower Antioxidant Level § | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GR | GPx | GSH | |||||||||||||
| Lower Antioxidant Level | Higher Antioxidant Level | β |
| IC (95%) | Lower Antioxidant Level | Higher Antioxidant Level | β |
| IC (95%) | Lower Antioxidant Level | Higher Antioxidant Level | β |
| IC (95%) | |
|
| 19.27 ± 4.50 | −9.57 ± 5.08 | 28.84 | <0.001 | 13.14–44.54 | −2.34 ± 4.38 | 12.04 ± 4.31 | −14.37 |
| −27.89–−0.87 | −1.76 ± 5.99 | 11.47 ± 4.38 | −13.23 | 0.144 | −31.00–4.54 |
|
| 17.48 ± 14.53 | 10.29 ± 13.14 | 7.19 | 0.744 | −35.96–50.34 | 13.97 ± 13.21 | 13.81 ± 14.78 | 0.15 | 0.995 | −43.84–44.14 | 17.26 ± 16.35 | 10.52 ± 13.78 | 6.74 | 0.789 | −42.54–56.02 |
|
| 275.90 ± 146.35 | −107.86 ± 130.76 | 383.77 | 0.085 | −52.44–819.99 | −302.33 ± 133.62 | 470.37 ± 146.06 | −772.70 |
| −12014.80–−330.60 | 338.12 ± 163.48 | −170.07 ± 138.93 | 508.20 |
| 10.21–1006.19 |
|
| 32.59 ± 15.72 | −6.96 ± 13.48 | 39.56 | 0.082 | −5.04–84.15 | −24.46 ± 14.30 | 50.08 ± 15.20 | −74.54 |
| −119.73–−29.36 | 38.26 ± 17.15 | −12.64 ± 14.32 | 50.91 |
| 0.61–101.21 |
IL-1β, Interleukin-1β (n = 22); IL-6, Interleukin-6 (n = 22); IL-10, Interleukin-10 (n = 23); TNF-α, Tumor Necrosis Factor α (n = 20); GR, Glutathione Reductase; GPx, Glutathione Peroxidase; GSH, Reduced Glutathione; SOD, Superoxide Dismutase; CAT, Catalase; SD, Standard Deviation; β, regression constant that represents the intercept of the line with the Y axis; IC, Confidence Interval. Generalized Linear Models (GLzM). Data adjusted for age, income and chemotherapy protocol. Values of p < 0.05 are shown in bold. § Higher antioxidant level was used as a reference category.
Association between levels of redox status markers and transcriptional levels of inflammatory markers in women with breast cancer at the end of chemotherapy (T2).
| Dependent Variables | Higher vs. Lower Antioxidant Level § | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SOD | CAT | |||||||||
| Lower Antioxidant Level | Higher Antioxidant Level | β |
| IC (95%) | Lower Antioxidant Level | Higher Antioxidant Level | β |
| IC (95%) | |
| IL-1β | 5.81 ± 4.22 | 3.89 ± 3.31 | 1.920 | 0.724 | −8.740–12.579 | 0.93 ± 3.33 | 8.77 ± 5.54 | −7.835 | 0.293 | −22.435–6.766 |
| IL-6 | 21.02 ± 14.00 | 6.76 ± 10.47 | 14.255 | 0.432 | −21.279–49.788 | 7.01 ± 11.05 | 20.77 ± 16.93 | −13.755 | 0.552 | −59.082–31.572 |
| IL-10 | −66.71 ± 141.21 | 234.75 ± 102.66 | −301.469 | 0.099 | −659.986–57.049 | 107.31 ± 111.76 | 60.72 ± 167.61 | 46.589 | 0.841 | −407.473–500.652 |
| TNF-α | 0.32 ± 15.83 | 25.30 ± 10.67 | −24.986 | 0.205 | −63.645–13.672 | 12.85 ± 11.52 | 12.78 ± 17.80 | 0.071 | 0.998 | −46.290–46.431 |
IL-1β, Interleukin-1β (n = 22); IL-6, Interleukin-6 (n = 22); IL-10, Interleukin-10 (n = 23); TNF-α, Tumor Necrosis Factor α (n = 20); GR, Glutathione Reductase; GPx, Glutathione Peroxidase; GSH, Reduced Glutathione; SOD, Superoxide Dismutase; CAT, Catalase; SD, Standard Deviation; β, regression constant that represents the intercept of the line with the Y axis; IC, Confidence Interval. Generalized Linear Models (GLzM). Data adjusted for age, income and chemotherapy protocol. § Higher antioxidant level was used as a reference category.
Figure 2Association of overweight with the Total Dietary Antioxidant Capacity without coffee (TACd) and with the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) at T0, T1 and T2 (n = 55). TACd, Total Dietary Antioxidant Capacity without coffee; DII, Dietary Inflammatory Index; T0, Period after the first chemotherapy cycle; T1, Period after intermediate chemotherapy cycle; T2, Period after the last chemotherapy cycle. Dark gray shows means for non-overweight women and light gray shows means for overweight women. Mann Whitney test.
Figure 3Association of overweight with plasma markers related redox status in T2 (n = 43). GR, Glutathione Reductase; GPx, Glutathione Peroxidase; GSH, Reduced Glutathione; SOD, Superoxide Dismutase; CAT, Catalase. * Value of p = 0.039. Dark gray shows means for non-overweight women and light gray shows means for overweight women. Mann Whitney test.
Figure 4Association of overweight with inflammatory markers in T2. IL-1β, Interleukin-1β (n = 22); IL-6, Interleukin-6 (n = 22); IL-10, Interleukin-10 (n = 23); TNF-α, Tumor Necrosis Factor α (n = 20). Dark gray shows means for non-overweight women and light gray shows means for overweight women. Mann Whitney test.