Abstract:Background
The 2007 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) guidelines encourage cancer survivors to follow its cancer prevention recommendations. We evaluated whether adherence to the WCRF/AICR guidelines for cancer prevention was associated with lower mortality among older female cancer survivors.
Methods
From 2004–2009, 2,017 participants in the Iowa Women’s Health Study who had a confirmed cancer diagnosis (1986–2002) and completed the 2004 follow-up questionnaire we… Show more
“…This approach has been used in several previous study populations [26,27,10]. For each individual recommendation, 1 point was assigned for complete adherence, 0.5 points for non-adherence level 1 (missed cut-point, but closer to recommendation) and 0 points for non-adherence level 2 (missed cut-point and further from recommendations).…”
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.
“…This approach has been used in several previous study populations [26,27,10]. For each individual recommendation, 1 point was assigned for complete adherence, 0.5 points for non-adherence level 1 (missed cut-point, but closer to recommendation) and 0 points for non-adherence level 2 (missed cut-point and further from recommendations).…”
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.
“…Once activated, STAT3 induces expression of antiapoptotic genes, proliferative genes such as Cyclin D1 or c-Myc and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) which is responsible for angiogenesis (Terzic et al, 2010). In the tumour cells themselves, STAT3 inhibits apoptosis by up-regulating pro-survival Bcl-2 proteins (Norat et al, 2014, Inoue-Choi et al, 2013. Furthermore, STAT3 induces tumourassociated inflammation by upregulating chemokines capable of attracting immune and inflammatory cells that further enhance STAT3 activity through the production of IL-6, IL-11 and other cytokines .…”
Current focus in colorectal cancer management is on reducing overall colorectal cancer mortality by increasing the number of early stage cancers diagnosed and treated with curative intent. There is good evidence that screening for colorectal cancer increases the number of early-stage cancers diagnosed and leads to a reduction of cancer specific mortality. Despite the success of the colorectal cancer screening programme in down-staging colorectal cancer, interval cancer rates are substantial and other strategies to reduce colorectal cancer risk and disease recurrence after surgery with curative intent are desirable.
“…3–6 In addition, survivors remain at increased risk for recurring primary cancers and secondary malignancies as well as comorbidities such as osteoporosis, cardiovascular disease, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. 7–9 Long-term secondary effects of treatment often affect this population, resulting in higher rates of all-cause mortality. 10,11 …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…17 Most cancer survivors consume diets high in saturated fat and low in fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, and they often fail to meet physical activity guidelines. 7,18 …”
Background
Cancer survivors remain at increased risk for secondary malignancies, comorbidities, and all-cause mortality. Lifestyle behaviors, such as diet and physical activity, are strongly linked to a decreased risk of chronic disease and improved health outcomes, yet a paucity of research has been conducted in this vulnerable population.
Methods
Adult cancer survivors were recruited to participate in Growing Hope, an experimental single-group study designed to assess the feasibility and efficacy of a theory-driven and evidence-based intervention. For 4 months, 22 participants received group and individual education and had access to harvesting fresh produce at an urban garden. Data on program satisfaction, compliance, diet, and physical activity were collected via surveys; anthropometrics, blood values, and skin carotenoids were objectively measured.
Results
The intervention resulted in significant improvements in consumption of fruits and vegetables (P = .003), decreased consumption of red and processed meats (P = .030) and sugar-sweetened beverages (P = .020). Levels of skin carotenoids, fasting blood glucose, and non–high density lipoprotein cholesterol were also significantly improved (P = .011, P = .043, and P = .05, respectively).
Conclusions
The results of this study support the feasibility and efficacy of a multifaceted, garden-based intervention for cancer survivors. In addition, these preliminary results demonstrate a positive impact aligning with the current lifestyle recommendations for cancer survivorship. Larger randomized controlled trials are warranted to define impact on sustained health outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.