Review of Nutrition Guidelines and Evidence on Diet and Survival Outcomes for Cancer Survivors: Call for Integrating Nutrition into Oncology Care.

Several organizations have published nutrition guidelines for cancer survivors during and after treatment. This review compared nutrition guidelines for cancer survivors published in the United States (US) for the topics that are covered in the guidelines and evaluated the evidence that these guidelines are based upon. A team of researchers, patient stakeholders, and healthcare providers collectively identified five nutrition guidelines for cancer survivors in the US: the 2022 American Cancer Society Nutrition and Physical Activity Guidelines for Cancer Survivors, the 2018 American Institute for Cancer Research Cancer Nutrition Guide, the 2022 National Cancer Institute Physician Data Query and Eating Hints, the 2024 National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines for Cancer Survivors, and the 2020 American Society for Clinical Oncology Guidelines. The five guidelines cover a comprehensive list of nutrition topics but overall promote to follow those recommendations for cancer prevention. This review also evaluated the current evidence from meta-analyses on dietary patterns and intakes of foods and nutrients in relation to survival outcomes among cancer survivors. Although the evidence on dietary patterns is strong, the evidence on most dietary factors is still limited and the current research was primarily conducted among breast and colorectal cancer survivors. While nutrition recommendations are available for cancer survivors, practical strategies need to be implemented to integrate nutrition into oncology care and help cancer survivors follow these recommendations. Further research is warranted to provide additional evidence on the role of nutrition in the health outcomes of cancer survivors and guide the development of evidence-based nutrition recommendations. REGISTRY AND REGISTRY NUMBER FOR SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS OR META-ANALYSES: The protocol is registered in PROSPERO: CRD42023429240.

EXERT-BC: A pilot study of an exercise regimen designed to improve functional mobility, body composition, and strength after the treatment for breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Resistance training may offer several unique advantages within breast cancer (BC) survivorship care; however, safety concerns have limited the application of high-intensity compound movements necessary to elicit optimal changes in body composition, strength, and quality of life in this population. The EXERT-BC trial assesses the safety and feasibility of an evidence-based, dose-escalated resistance training regimen among BC survivors, with the goal of improving physical and metabolic function, mobility, muscle mass, and body composition. METHODS: Participants included women with breast cancer underwent a 3-month thrice weekly exercise regimen involving dose escalation of high-intensity compound exercises. Coprimary outcomes included safety and adherence. Pre- and post-regimen assessment included body composition testing, functional mobility and balance, total load (weight × repetitions × sets) across compound exercises, and patient reported quality of life. Pairwise comparison was performed via the paired t test. RESULTS: Fourty participants completed a 3-month exercise regimen, with a median age of 57 years (range, 27-74 years) and 73% having stage 0-2 BC. BC therapies concurrent with exercise included anti-estrogen therapy (80%), radiotherapy (30%), and non-hormonal systemic therapy (15%). No adverse events were observed aside from a single case of self-limited knee pain. Session attendance exceeded a prespecified threshold of 75%, and 98% patients reported ongoing compliance to an exercise regimen following regimen completion. Significant reductions in percent body fat (p < 0.001) and increases in percent muscle mass (p = 0.011) were observed. Significant increases in resting metabolic rate (p = 0.023), bilateral grip strength (p < 0.001), functional movement screen (p < 0.001), bilateral Y-Balance testing (p < 0.001), and Godin questionnaire scores (p < 0.001) were observed. CONCLUSION: A 3-month dose-escalated resistance training regimen comprising high-intensity compound movements appears safe with a high degree of adherence among breast cancer survivors, resulting in demonstrable improvements in body composition, metabolic parameters, strength increases, and patient-reported quality of life.

EXERT-BC: Prospective Study of an Exercise Regimen After Treatment for Breast Cancer.

Purpose EXERT-BC is a dose-escalated resistance training regimen created to improve body composition, strength, and balance in women treated for breast cancer (BC). Herein, we report the interim analysis. Women treated for BC underwent this 3-month exercise regimen in an exercise oncology facility with continual monitoring of load and strength. Twenty women completed the IRB-approved protocol, with a mean age of 57 years (range 41-74). Concurrent therapies included anti-estrogen therapy (73%), chemotherapy (14%), and radiotherapy (23%). 27% of women endorsed prior exercise. Subjects missed an average of 1.75 classes (range 0-7), with all meeting adherence over 75%. No injuries or adverse events were reported aside from muscle soreness and 2 days of knee pain. Significant differences in body composition at completion included reduced body fat (38.2% vs. 36.7%, p=0.003), and increased muscle mass (33.1% vs. 37.1%, p<0.001), functional mobility screening (9.82 vs. 11.73, p=0.018), and Y-balance (left: 72.4 vs. 85.3, p=0.001; right: 70.3 vs. 85.2. p<0.001). Significant increases in load were demonstrated: split squat (p<0.001), trap bar deadlift (p=0.035), inclined dumbbell press (p<0.001), and bird dog rows (p<0.001). Dose-escalated resistance training in women with BC is safe and feasible, endorsing significant improvements across body composition, balance, and strength.

Resistance Training for Patients with Cancer: A Conceptual Framework for Maximizing Strength, Power, Functional Mobility, and Body Composition to Optimize Health and Outcomes.

There are many benefits to the addition of exercise to cancer treatment and survivorship, particularly with resistance training regimens that target hypertrophy, bone mineral density, strength, functional mobility, and body composition. These goals are best achieved through a series of individualized high-intensity compound movements that mirror functional mobility patterns and sufficiently stress the musculoskeletal system. As a result of adequate stress, the body will engage compensatory cellular mechanisms that improve the structural integrity of bones and muscles, stimulate metabolism and the immune system, optimize functional performance, and minimize mechanical injury risk. The current evidence suggests that application of the above exercise principles, practiced in a safe environment under expert observation, may offer patients with cancer an effective means of improving overall health and cancer-specific outcomes. The following article poses several important questions certified exercise specialists and physicians should consider when prescribing resistance exercise for patients with cancer.

Dietary-Induced Ketogenesis: Adults Are Not Children.

There is increasing interest in the use of a ketogenic diet for various adult disorders; however, the ability of adults to generate ketones is unknown. Our goal was to challenge the hypothesis that there would be no difference between adults and children regarding their ability to enter ketosis. METHODS: Two populations were studied, both treated with identical very low-carbohydrate high-fat diets: a retrospective series of children with epilepsy or/and metabolic disorders (2009-2016) and a prospective clinical trial of adults with glioblastoma. Dietary intake was assessed based upon written food diaries and 24-h dietary recall. Ketogenic ratio was calculated according to [grams of fat consumed]/[grams of carbohydrate and protein consumed]. Ketone levels (ß-hydroxybutyrate) were measured in blood and/or urine. RESULTS: A total of 168 encounters amongst 28 individuals were analyzed. Amongst both children and adults, ketone levels correlated with nutritional ketogenic ratio; however, the absolute ketone levels in adults were approximately one quarter of those seen in children. This difference was highly significant in a multivariate linear regression model, p < 0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: For diets with comparable ketogenic ratios, adults have lower blood ketone levels than children; consequently, high levels of nutritional ketosis are unobtainable in adults.

Recumbent Total Skin Electron Beam Therapy.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to describe preliminary dosimetric and clinical results of a recumbent total skin electron beam therapy (TSEBT) technique and compare this to a conventional standing TSEBT technique. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A customized treatment platform with recessed side wheels was constructed and commissioned for patients to be treated in a recumbent position. Dosimetric and clinical information was collected for patients treated with this new recumbent technique in addition to that of a cohort of patients treated contemporaneously using the conventional standing method. Dose delivery and clinical outcomes were compared for patients treated with the recumbent and standing techniques. RESULTS: Between 2017 and 2019, 27 patients were treated with TSEBT with the recumbent (n = 13) or conventional standing technique (n = 14) at our institution. Measured dose at 15 body sites could be directly compared. Of these, 10 showed no significant difference between the two techniques while five sites showed significant differences in median measured dose, including the top of left shoulder, right biceps, bend of left elbow, upper back, and medial right thigh (P < .003). Measured dose was significantly higher with the standing technique at these sites with the exception of the upper back. Rates of complete response (25% vs 23%), partial response (50% vs 69%), and stable disease (17% vs 8%) were similar between the standing and recumbent cohorts, respectively (P = .78). CONCLUSIONS: We have developed, commissioned, and implemented a floor-based, recumbent technique that allows for treatment of patients who would otherwise not be eligible for TSEBT. Dosimetric and clinical measurements suggest that this technique is a viable alternative to the standing method.

Effective Pain Control With Very Low Dose Palliative Radiation Therapy for Patients With Multiple Myeloma With Uncomplicated Osseous Lesions.

BACKGROUND: Osteolytic lesions are present in 75% of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) and frequently require palliation with radiation therapy (RT). Prior case series of patients with MM with bone pain undergoing palliative RT suggests doses ≥12 Gy (equivalent dose in 2Gy fractions, EQD2) provide excellent bone pain relief. However, recent advances in care and novel biologic agents have significantly improved overall survival and quality of life for patients with MM. We hypothesized that lower-dose RT (LDRT, EQD2 <12 Gy) offers an effective alternative to higher-dose RT (HDRT, EQD2 ≥12 Gy) for palliation of painful, uncomplicated MM bone lesions. METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients with MM treated with RT for uncomplicated, painful bone lesions and stratified by EQD2 ≥/< 12 Gy. Clinical pain response (CPR) rates, acute and late toxicity, pain response duration, and retreatment rates between LDRT and HDRT groups were analyzed. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients with 70 treated lesions were included: 24 patients (48 lesions) treated with HDRT and 11 patients (22 lesions) with LDRT. Median follow-up was 14 and 16.89 months for HDRT and LDRT, respectively. The median dose of HDRT treatment was 20 Gy versus 4 Gy in the LDRT group. The CPR rate was 98% for HDRT and 95% for LDRT. There was no significant difference in any-grade acute toxicity between the HDRT and LDRT cohorts (24.5% vs 9.1%, Χ2 P = .20). Pain recurred in 10% of lesions (12% HDRT vs 9.5% LDRT). Median duration of pain response did not significantly differ between cohorts (P = .91). Five lesions were retreated, 2 (9.5%) in the LDRT cohort, and 3 (6.3%) in the HDRT cohort. CONCLUSION: In this study, LDRT effectively palliated painful, uncomplicated MM bony lesions with acceptable CPR and duration of palliation. These data support prospective comparisons of LDRT versus HDRT for palliation of painful, uncomplicated MM bony lesions.

A Phase I clinical trial of dose-escalated metabolic therapy combined with concomitant radiation therapy in high-grade glioma.

BACKGROUND: Animal brain-tumor models have demonstrated a synergistic interaction between radiation therapy and a ketogenic diet (KD). Metformin has in-vitro anti-cancer activity, through AMPK activation and mTOR inhibition. We hypothesized that the metabolic stress induced by a KD combined with metformin would enhance radiation's efficacy. We sought to assess the tolerability and feasibility of this approach. METHODS: A single-institution phase I clinical trial. Radiotherapy was either 60 or 35 Gy over 6 or 2 weeks, for newly diagnosed and recurrent gliomas, respectively. The dietary intervention consisted of a Modified Atkins Diet (ModAD) supplemented with medium chain triglycerides (MCT). There were three cohorts: Dietary intervention alone, and dietary intervention combined with low-dose or high-dose metformin; all patients received radiotherapy. Factors associated with blood ketone levels were investigated using a mixed-model analysis. RESULTS: A total of 13 patients were accrued, median age 61 years, of whom six had newly diagnosed and seven with recurrent disease. All completed radiation therapy; five patients stopped the metabolic intervention early. Metformin 850 mg three-times daily was poorly tolerated. There were no serious adverse events. Ketone levels were associated with dietary factors (ketogenic ratio, p < 0.001), use of metformin (p = 0. 02) and low insulin levels (p = 0.002). Median progression free survival was ten and four months for newly diagnosed and recurrent disease, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention was well tolerated. Higher serum ketone levels were associated with both dietary intake and metformin use. The recommended phase II dose is eight weeks of a ModAD combined with 850 mg metformin twice daily.

Quantity of Resistance Exercise for Breast Cancer Patients: Does the Dose Match the Objective?

ABSTRACT: Rosenberg, J, Hyde, PN, Yancy, WS, Ford, KM, and Champ, CE. Quantity of resistance exercise for breast cancer patients: does the dose match the objective? J Strength Cond Res 35(5): 1467-1476, 2021-There is currently a lack of consensus as to what defines exercise and resistance training in the cancer setting and whether current studies comply with exercise guidelines. This study aimed to quantify the available research studies using resistance training exercise interventions in the breast cancer setting for future clinical trial utilization. We systemically reviewed all available resistance exercise studies during and after breast cancer treatment in an attempt to quantify to the prescribed dose and whether regimens aligned with general exercise guidelines to improve functional mobility, body composition, and metabolic function. They were then compared with recommendations set forth by the national committees that create evidence-based exercise guidelines. Fifty studies met the initial criteria, with 35 meeting analysis criteria for evaluation. Fifteen studies evaluated an exercise regimen during cancer treatment, and 20 evaluated a regimen after treatment. The average adherence rates were 84% for all studies. Only 23 studies listed specific exercises used within the protocol. Most exercise regimens relied on open chain movements and machine exercises. Around half of studies met criteria to achieve hypertrophy, and 66% met American College of Sports Medicine exercise guidelines for cancer patients. A minority of breast cancer studies implementing a resistance training exercise regimen prescribed a regimen or specific dose that follows general exercise guidelines. This study highlights a potential deficiency in exercise programs designed for patients with breast cancer, and these findings should be considered in future study design.

Clinical Experience With Machine Learning-Based Automated Treatment Planning for Whole Breast Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: The machine learning-based automated treatment planning (MLAP) tool has been developed and evaluated for breast radiation therapy planning at our institution. We implemented MLAP for patient treatment and assessed our clinical experience for its performance. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 102 patients of breast or chest wall treatment plans were prospectively evaluated with institutional review board approval. A human planner executed MLAP to create an auto-plan via automation of fluence maps generation. If judged necessary, a planner further fine-tuned the fluence maps to reach a final plan. Planners recorded the time required for auto-planning and manual modification. Target (ie, breast or chest wall and nodes) coverage and dose homogeneity were compared between the auto-plan and final plan. RESULTS: Cases without nodes (n = 71) showed negligible (<1%) differences for target coverage and dose homogeneity between the auto-plan and final plan. Cases with nodes (n = 31) also showed negligible difference for target coverage. However, mean ± standard deviation of volume receiving 105% of the prescribed dose and maximum dose were reduced from 43.0% ± 26.3% to 39.4% ± 23.7% and 119.7% ± 9.5% to 114.4% ± 8.8% from auto-plan to final plan, respectively, all with P ≤ .01 for cases with nodes (n = 31). Mean ± standard deviation time spent for auto-plans and additional fluence modification for final plans were 12.1 ± 9.3 and 13.1 ± 12.9 minutes, respectively, for cases without nodes, and 16.4 ± 9.7 and 26.4 ± 16.4 minutes, respectively, for cases with nodes. CONCLUSIONS: The MLAP tool has been successfully implemented for routine clinical practice and has significantly improved planning efficiency. Clinical experience indicates that auto-plans are sufficient for target coverage, but improvement is warranted to reduce high dose volume for cases with nodal irradiation. This study demonstrates the clinical implementation of auto-planning for patient treatment and the significant importance of integrating human experience and feedback to improve MLAP for better clinical translation.

Primary Mediastinal (Thymic) Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Fidelity of Diagnosis Using WHO Criteria.

PURPOSE: Diagnosing primary mediastinal (thymic) large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) is challenging because it is a clinicopathologic entity that shares characteristics with other lymphomas and lacks pathognomonic features. We sought to investigate the fidelity between a working diagnosis of PMBCL at our institution and the clinicopathologic criteria established within the 2017 World Health Organization (WHO) classification. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Medical records and archived tissue of patients treated for stage I-II PMBCL from 1998 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed for clinical and pathologic conformity with current WHO criteria. Disease was characterized as definitely PMBCL if all of the following were present: anterior mediastinal mass with or without lymph node involvement, no extranodal disease, B-cell antigen expression, Epstein-Barr virus negativity, and at least one supportive feature: female gender under age 40, bulky primary tumor, CD30 weakly positive, compartmentalizing alveolar fibrosis, lack of surface immunoglobulin expression, and MUM1 or CD23 positivity. Disease without supportive features or other pathologic findings more suggestive of other entities was characterized as equivocal for PMBCL. Lack of an anterior mediastinal mass, presence of distant lymph node involvement or extranodal disease, lack of B-cell antigen expression, or Epstein-Barr virus positivity were characterized as definitely not PMBCL. Clinical management and outcomes were also assessed. RESULTS: Of 63 patients treated for presumed stage I-II PMBCL, 58 (92%) met the criteria for PMBCL. The most common reason for a discordant diagnosis was lack of an anterior mediastinal mass (n = 3). Two additional patients were characterized as having disease equivocal for PMBCL. In retrospect, one patient most likely had a mediastinal gray zone lymphoma due to CD15 positivity and another diffuse large B cell, not otherwise specified, at pathologic review. Five-year progression-free and overall survival were 67% (95% confidence interval, 54-77) and 81% (95% confidence interval, 68-89), respectively, for all patients. CONCLUSION: Despite the complexity of the clinicopathologic criteria of PMBCL, most patients (92%) who were treated for stage I-II PMBCL at our institution appear to have been accurately diagnosed.

Quality of Regional Nodal Irradiation Plans in Breast Cancer Patients Across a Large Network-Can We Translate Results From Randomized Trials Into the Clinic?

PURPOSE: Regional nodal irradiation (RNI) improved disease-free survival by 3% to 5% in 2 large randomized trials, but this small absolute advantage relies on accurate contouring and dose delivery. We audited our network to determine compliance on regional nodal coverage, contouring, and dosimetric parameters with respect to accepted guidelines. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In our network, we have established a clinical pathway for patients with node-positive breast cancer that guides indications for RNI and dosimetric goals. We reviewed records of 183 patients with nodal macrometastases after upfront surgery or involved nodes of any size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Radiation treatment plans were examined to determine lymph node volumes treated, whether nodes were contoured, quality of nodal contours, and whether target coverage and normal organ dosimetric constraints were met when RNI was delivered. RESULTS: Despite the presence of macrometastases on sentinel lymph node biopsy, no lymph nodes were treated in 2.2% (4 of 183). Of 179 patients who received nodal irradiation, 18 received radiation to axillary levels 1 and 2 only, and 161 patients received RNI. Overall, regional nodes were not treated despite strong indications in 7.6% (14 of 183). Treated nodes were not contoured for 2.2% (4 of 179), and lymph node contours were unacceptable in 15.4% (27 of 175). Of patients receiving RNI, 14.9% (24 of 161) did not have adequate nodal target volume coverage, mean heart dose was >4 Gy for 3.1% (5 of 161), and lung V20 Gy was >35% for 8.7% (14 of 161). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to indications for regional nodal treatment was high, but nodes were either not contoured or had unacceptable contour quality in 18% of plans, and coverage was inadequate in 15%. Because the small disease-free survival advantage seen in trials may be decreased with these deviations, routine clinical practice requires detailed peer review to fully translate results of clinical trials.

Nutrition in Cancer: Evidence and Equality.

PURPOSE: Poor nutrition is highly implicated in the pathogenesis of cancer and affects the survival of patients during and after completion of definitive therapies. Mechanistic evidence accumulated over the last century now firmly places dysregulated cellular energetics within the emerging hallmarks of cancer. Nutritional intervention studies often aim to either enhance treatment effect or treat nutritional deficiencies that portend poor prognoses. Patients living within food priority areas have a high risk of nutritional need and are more likely to develop comorbidities, including diabetes, hypertension, renal disease, and cardiovascular risk factors. Unfortunately, there is currently a paucity of data analyzing the impact of food priority areas on cancer outcomes. METHODS: Therefore, we performed a review of the literature focusing on the molecular and clinical interplay of cancer and nutrition, the importance of clinical trials in elucidating how to intervene in this setting and the significance of including citizens who live in food priority areas in these future prospective studies. CONCLUSIONS: Given the importance of nutrition as an emerging hallmark of cancer, further research must be aimed at directing the optimal nutrition strategy throughout oncologic treatments, including the supplementation of nutritious foods to those that are otherwise unable to attain them.

A systematic review of home-based dietary interventions during radiation therapy for cancer.

PURPOSE: Our objectives are to assess (1) the acceptability and feasibility of dietary interventions for patients undergoing radiation therapy (RT), and (2) the impact of dietary interventions on patient reported outcomes, toxicities, and survival. METHODS: A PICOS/PRISMA/MOOSE selection protocol was used to include articles that evaluate adding dietary interventions to patients receiving RT. Acceptability was defined as (# accepting/# approached); feasibility was (# completing/# approached). Patient-reported outcomes were reported based on questionnaires used in each study and survival was measured from the date of diagnosis until death in each study. Level of evidence was assessed with Center for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM) criteria. RESULTS: Sixteen articles were included; among these, 2027 patients were approached regarding the intervention, and 1661 accepted (81.9%); of these, 1543 (92.9%) completed the prescribed diet + RT course. The most common cancers included were gynecological, head and neck, and gastrointestinal. For patients with pelvic cancers, a high fiber diet may improve diarrhea (CEBM level 1b). Enteral nutrition formula, including formulas with proteins such as L-arginine, lipids such as eicosapentaenoic acids, glucids, and ribonucleotides, may help prevent of malnutrition in head and neck cancer patients undergoing RT (level 2b). Vitamin C and ß-carotene may reduce of xerostomia in head and neck cancer patients; however, the studies evaluating these vitamins included vitamin E, which increases all-cause mortality (level 2b). No dietary intervention for cancer patients receiving RT has been shown to improve survival. CONCLUSION: There are limited data to support safe and efficacious use of dietary interventions during RT.

Impact of a ketogenic diet intervention during radiotherapy on body composition: III-final results of the KETOCOMP study for breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Obesity and low muscle mass are associated with worse outcomes of breast cancer patients. We conducted a controlled trial to study the impact of a ketogenic diet (KD) based on natural foods versus an unspecified standard diet (SD) on body composition in breast cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy. METHODS: Patients with non-metastasized breast cancer were allocated to either the KD (N = 32) or the SD (N = 31) during radiotherapy. Body composition was measured weekly by bioimpedance analysis. Blood parameters and quality of life were assessed before, during, and at the end of radiotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 29 KD and 30 SD patients completed the study. During radiotherapy, mean and median fasting BHB concentrations in the KD group were 0.72 and 0.49 mmol/l (range 0.06-4.9) which was significantly higher than those in the SD group (p < 2.2 × 10-16). There was a very small and insignificant increase in body weight and fat mass in the SD group, as well as a decrease of fat free mass. In contrast, patients in the KD group lost body weight and fat free and skeletal muscle mass quickly after diet onset, which for the most part was related to water losses. The KD did not cause further substantial changes in fat free or skeletal muscle mass, but was associated with a gradual decrease of 0.4 kg body weight and fat mass per week (p < 0.0001). The KD significantly decreased free T3 levels by 0.06 pg/ml/week (p = 6.3 × 10-5). Global quality of life remained stable in the SD group but increased in the KD group from a score of 66.7 to 75.0 (p = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: In breast cancer patients undergoing curative radiotherapy, a KD based on natural foods is feasible. After initial water losses, the KD tends to reduce body weight and fat mass while preserving fat free and skeletal muscle mass. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02516501 , registered on August 06, 2015.

Assessing successful completion of calorie restriction studies for the prevention and treatment of cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Calorie restriction (CR) >20% has been hypothesized to aid cancer prevention and treatment. Yet, to our knowledge, there is a lack of reported studies in humans describing tolerance, adherence, or efficacy, and unpublished and incomplete dietary studies may indicate lack of tolerability and compliance. The aim of this study was to assess registered clinical trials using CR for cancer treatment and prevention, rates of completion, and published reports to determine whether barriers to publication may be indicative of either negative studies, or incompletion due to unreported compliance issues. METHODS: Current registered clinical trials assessing CR in cancer prevention and treatment were assessed at clinicaltrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry at the World Health Organization. Assessment of study completion and publication was calculated and compared with methods of CR used, as were rates of inactive and incomplete studies, dormant studies, time of dormancy, type of study, and generalizable conclusions. RESULTS: Twenty-nine trials were registered assessing CR in cancer treatment or prevention. Of these studies, 18 met initial criteria, and only 4 had completed and published results. Three of these tested a CR regimen incorporating exercise or intermittent restriction. Target CR ranged from 500 to 1000 kcal/d, with one study aim of 20% CR; no study reported rates of actual calorie intake. The majority of dormant and unpublished studies (69%) used general dietary CR and was without update ranging from 265 to 2518 d. Only one study reported on the side effects of the CR regimen; compliance and adherence to the regimen was described in the four completed studies that reported results. Only two studies were registered as pilot studies testing the feasibility of CR. CONCLUSIONS: Poor completion and lack of reporting of results is apparent in the majority of studies assessing CR for cancer prevention or treatment. These findings should be considered during the design of future studies assessing dietary strategies for cancer prevention or treatment.

Regional Recurrence Rates With or Without Complete Axillary Dissection for Breast Cancer Patients with Node-Positive Disease on Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Current standard of care for patients with breast cancer with a positive node on sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is axillary dissection with irradiation of the regional nodes, but it is unknown whether axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) can be safely omitted if complete axillary radiation is delivered instead. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We identified 161 patients found to have a positive sentinel lymph node on SLNB after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer between December 2006 and October 2017, who were treated with or without completion ALND. Local, regional, and distant recurrence and overall survival were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Patient, disease, and treatment factors potentially predictive of each outcome were entered into Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 28.8 months (range, 2.5-137.0). The 3-year regional control rate did not differ according to extent of axillary surgery (92.6% for SLNB alone vs 96.4% for SLNB with ALND, P = .616). Regional recurrence occurred as part of first recurrence in 9 patients (5.6%). Five patients failed in axillary levels 1 or 2, 6 failed in axillary level 3 or supraclavicular nodes, and 2 failed in internal mammary nodes, with some patients failing in multiple regional nodal areas. Extent of axillary dissection (SLNB only vs SLNB plus ALND) did not predict for disease control or survival. Patients who underwent ALND were significantly more likely to have lymphedema (25.0% vs 9.4%, P = .021). CONCLUSIONS: Careful selection of patients with a positive sentinel node on SLNB after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for omission of completion ALND in favor of irradiation of the undissected axilla does not compromise local, regional, or distant control or overall survival and results in lower rates of lymphedema.

Assessment of deep inspiration breath hold technique setup reproducibility using mega voltage imaging for left breast cancer radiation therapy-integrated network study.

We evaluated daily setup reproducibility of deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) using mega voltage (MV) imaging for left breast cancer radiation therapy. Analysis of 109 left breast cancer patients across UPMC Hillman Cancer Center network treated using DIBH technique with daily MV imaging was done. Patient characteristics, MV imaging procedure used and inter-fraction directional shifts were collected. For the statistical analyses, we separated all patients into 2 groups in each of the following 3 categories; (1) obese (BMI ≥ 30) vs nonobese, (2) mastectomy vs lumpectomy, (3) internal mammary node (IMN) treatment vs no IMN treatment. The group mean inter-fraction directional shifts were as following: (1) 0.7 mm (superior), 0.8 mm (inferior); (2) 0.65 mm (left), 0.64 mm (right); (3) 0.89 mm (anterior), 0.83 mm (posterior). Also, any directional shift ≥ 2 mm, ≥ 3 mm, ≥ 4 mm, ≥ 5 mm, ≥ 10 mm was found to be 52.9%, 37.6%, 30.9%, 21.9%, 3.7% of total fractions, respectively. In the stratified analysis, obese patients had larger directional shifts (p < 0.05) and highly associated with number of fractions for ≥ 5 mm in any directional shift compared to nonobese patients (29% vs 17%; p = 0.04). DIBH setup for left breast cancer treatment at our large cancer center network was reproducible with any mean directional shifts less than 1.0 mm using MV imaging. Daily imaging would be more beneficial for obese patients compared to nonobese patients.