RESUMEN
Nutrition is essential for peripheral nerve function, yet dietary factors associated with chronic chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) remain poorly characterized. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to determine differences in diet quality and macronutrients for cancer survivors with and without CIPN. Cancer survivors (e.g., ≥3 months post platinum and/or taxane-based neurotoxic chemotherapy) with (i.e., ≥1/4 PRO-CTACE™ Numbness and Tingling Severity) and without CIPN completed the VioScreen Research Graphical Food Frequency Questionnaire. The association among diet (Healthy Eating Index [HEI]), macronutrient intake (average percent caloric intake), and CIPN severity were analyzed using generalized linear regression models, adjusting for caloric intake, body mass index, age, and sex. Results revealed that for each one-point increase in diet quality, PRO-CTCAE severity decreased by -0.06 (95% CI: -0.10, -0.02, P < 0.01). Participants without CIPN reported higher diet quality than those with CIPN (HEI mean: 70.11 vs 68.45) (OR = 0.94, P = 0.03, 95% CI: 0.89, 0.99). Participants with CIPN had significantly higher carbohydrate consumption than participants without CIPN (OR = 1.11, P = 0.04, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.22). There were no significant differences in consumption of proteins or fats between groups. Further research should be pursued to discover the potential benefits of dietary interventions for CIPN management among cancers survivors.
RESUMEN
Purpose: Few studies have specifically targeted symptom management interventions for adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors. A greater understanding of AYA cancer survivors' experiences with cancer treatment-related symptoms would help develop age-appropriate oncology symptom management interventions. The purpose of this qualitative analysis was to explore AYA cancer survivors' experience with cancer treatment-related symptoms. Methods: Nineteen post-treatment AYA cancer survivors (18-39 years old) who self-reported moderate-severe cancer treatment-related symptom severity participated in video conferencing or telephone interviews. The questions in the interview guide queried participants to share their experience with cancer treatment-related symptoms. Inductive content analysis was used to identify themes from the interviews. Results: The themes that emerged from the interviews included (1) cancer treatment-related symptoms negatively affected AYA cancer survivors' quality of life (e.g., symptoms served as a reminder of cancer recurrence possibility); (2) AYA cancer survivors' attitudes and feelings about communicating cancer treatment-related symptom concerns to clinicians (e.g., patient-clinician communication was bolstered when AYAs perceived that symptoms were being taken seriously); (3) AYA cancer survivors are interested in oncology symptom management clinical trials, but logistical challenges are barriers to participation; and (4) AYA cancer survivors are interested in nonpharmacological treatments for symptom management. Conclusion: Results highlight the burden of cancer treatment-related symptoms on day-to-day life among post-treatment AYA cancer survivors. Future work is needed to identify nonpharmacological symptom management interventions, strategies to improve patient-clinician communication about symptoms, and strategies to increase the visibility and accessibility of symptom management clinical trials for AYA cancer survivors.