Henrique de Araújo Vianna Träsel1,2, Frederico Soares Falcetta2,3, Fernando Kude de Almeida1, Mariana Rangel Ribeiro Falcetta2,4, Rodrigo Antonini Ribeiro5, Daniela Dornelles Rosa1,6. 1. Post-Graduate Program of Pathology, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 2. Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos, UNISINOS, São Leopoldo, Brazil. 3. Hospital Fêmina, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 4. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 5. Post-Graduate Program in Epidemiology, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 6. Hospital Moinhos de Vento, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Randomized clinical trials (RCT) are inconclusive regarding the role of dietary interventions in anthropometric measurements and survival in breast cancer patients. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of diet on these outcomes in women treated for early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: Embase, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for RCT comparing dietary interventions (individualized dietary counseling, prescription of a specific diet, or others) with usual care in women that were treated for early breast cancer. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS); secondary outcome was a change in body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: We found 12 RCT eligible for analysis, 7 of which were included in the quantitative analysis. Two studies reported OS and DFS and 6 reported BMI data. The hazard ratio (HR) for OS and DFS was 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-1.07, p = 0.25) and 0.92 (95% CI 0.79-1.08, p = 0.31) for the intervention and control groups, respectively. Intervention was associated with BMI reduction in subjects who received a specific diet instead of counseling or other types of intervention (-0.67; 95% CI -1.14 to -0.21). CONCLUSIONS: Despite increasing survival among breast cancer patients due to better oncological treatments, there is still a lack of prospective data regarding the effects of dietary interventions in this population. We found positive association between prescription of specific diets in terms of anthropometric measures; there were no differences in OS or DFS.
PURPOSE: Randomized clinical trials (RCT) are inconclusive regarding the role of dietary interventions in anthropometric measurements and survival in breast cancer patients. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of diet on these outcomes in women treated for early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: Embase, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for RCT comparing dietary interventions (individualized dietary counseling, prescription of a specific diet, or others) with usual care in women that were treated for early breast cancer. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS); secondary outcome was a change in body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: We found 12 RCT eligible for analysis, 7 of which were included in the quantitative analysis. Two studies reported OS and DFS and 6 reported BMI data. The hazard ratio (HR) for OS and DFS was 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-1.07, p = 0.25) and 0.92 (95% CI 0.79-1.08, p = 0.31) for the intervention and control groups, respectively. Intervention was associated with BMI reduction in subjects who received a specific diet instead of counseling or other types of intervention (-0.67; 95% CI -1.14 to -0.21). CONCLUSIONS: Despite increasing survival among breast cancer patients due to better oncological treatments, there is still a lack of prospective data regarding the effects of dietary interventions in this population. We found positive association between prescription of specific diets in terms of anthropometric measures; there were no differences in OS or DFS.
Authors: Howard Balshem; Mark Helfand; Holger J Schünemann; Andrew D Oxman; Regina Kunz; Jan Brozek; Gunn E Vist; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Joerg Meerpohl; Susan Norris; Gordon H Guyatt Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2011-01-05 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: R T Chlebowski; D W Nixon; G L Blackburn; P Jochimsen; E F Scanlon; W Insull; I M Buzzard; R Elashoff; R Butrum; E L Wynder Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 1987-10 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: P Goodwin; M J Esplen; K Butler; J Winocur; K Pritchard; S Brazel; J Gao; A Miller Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Alessandro Liberati; Douglas G Altman; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Cynthia Mulrow; Peter C Gøtzsche; John P A Ioannidis; Mike Clarke; P J Devereaux; Jos Kleijnen; David Moher Journal: BMJ Date: 2009-07-21
Authors: Cheryl L Rock; Shirley W Flatt; Cynthia A Thomson; Marcia L Stefanick; Vicky A Newman; Lovell A Jones; Loki Natarajan; Cheryl Ritenbaugh; Kathryn A Hollenbach; John P Pierce; R Jeffrey Chang Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-06-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Krystle E Zuniga; Dorothy Long Parma; Edgar Muñoz; Mackenzie Spaniol; Michael Wargovich; Amelie G Ramirez Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2018-09-26 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: John P Pierce; Loki Natarajan; Bette J Caan; Barbara A Parker; E Robert Greenberg; Shirley W Flatt; Cheryl L Rock; Sheila Kealey; Wael K Al-Delaimy; Wayne A Bardwell; Robert W Carlson; Jennifer A Emond; Susan Faerber; Ellen B Gold; Richard A Hajek; Kathryn Hollenbach; Lovell A Jones; Njeri Karanja; Lisa Madlensky; James Marshall; Vicky A Newman; Cheryl Ritenbaugh; Cynthia A Thomson; Linda Wasserman; Marcia L Stefanick Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-07-18 Impact factor: 56.272