Obesity and Its Impact on Outcomes in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer Receiving Adjuvant Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Even though obesity is a well-established risk factor for developing colon cancer, its prognostic value is not very well understood. The present study elucidated the effect of obesity, as measured by the body mass index (BMI) and body surface area (BSA), on colon cancer outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of stage III colon cancer from 2011 to 2016 who had undergone adjuvant chemotherapy in Alberta, Canada were identified. The demographic variables, treatment characteristics, and survival data were collected from the electronic medical records. Obesity was defined using the BMI in accordance with the World Health Organization criteria, and BSA was categorized as ≤ 2.0 m2 (low) and > 2.0 m2 (high). The effect of BMI and BSA on 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) was analyzed using univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 915 patients were identified with a median age of 64 years. Of these, 37% were overweight or obese, and the BSA was high in 42% of the patients. The survival outcomes for the obese and underweight patients were not significantly different from those with a normal BMI (P = .61 and P = .30 for OS and CSS, respectively). Similarly, no correlation was found between BSA and OS or CSS. Although 21% of patients experienced a > 10-week delay in receiving adjuvant chemotherapy, neither BMI nor BSA correlated significantly with chemotherapy timing (P = .45). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that BMI and BSA do not correlate with survival outcomes in patients with stage III colon cancer. The role of a healthy lifestyle in an improved colon cancer prognosis might not be driven by its effects on obesity.

Self-management interventions for cancer survivors: A systematic review and evaluation of intervention content and theories.

OBJECTIVE: Self-management has been proposed as a strategy to help cancer patients optimize their health and well-being during survivorship. Previous reviews have shown variable effects of self-management on outcomes. The theoretical basis and psychoeducational components of these interventions have not been evaluated in detail. We aimed to evaluate the evidence for self-management and provide a description of the components of these interventions. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of self-management interventions for adults who had completed primary cancer treatment by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry, and Cochrane CENTRAL Registry of Controlled Trials. We included experimental and quasiexperimental designs. Data synthesis included narrative and tabular summary of results; heterogeneity of interventions and outcomes precluded meta-analysis. Study quality was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool or the risk of bias of nonrandomized studies tool. RESULTS: Forty-one studies published between 1994 and 29 March 2018 were included. Studies were predominantly randomized controlled trials and targeted to breast cancer survivors. A variety of intervention designs, psychoeducational components, and outcomes were identified. Less than 50% of the studies included a theoretical framework. There was variability of effects across most outcomes. Risk of bias could not be fully assessed. CONCLUSIONS: There are limitations in the design and research on self-management interventions for cancer survivors that hinder their translation into clinical practice. Further research is needed to understand if these interventions are an important type of support for cancer survivors.