Explore the vast range of titles available.

Introduction The Predicting Risk of Cancer at Screening study in Manchester, UK, is a prospective study of breast cancer risk estimation. It was designed to assess whether mammographic density may help in refinement of breast cancer risk estimation using either the Gail model (Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool) or the Tyrer-Cuzick model (International Breast Intervention Study model). Methods Mammographic density was measured at entry as a percentage visual assessment, adjusted for age and body mass index. Tyrer-Cuzick and Gail 10-year risks were based on a questionnaire completed contemporaneously. Breast cancers were identified at the entry screen or shortly thereafter. The contribution of density to risk models was assessed using odds ratios (ORs) with profile likelihood confidence intervals (CIs) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). The calibration of predicted ORs was estimated as a percentage [(observed vs expected (O/E)] from logistic regression. Results The analysis included 50,628 women aged 47–73 years who were recruited between October 2009 and September 2013. Of these, 697 had breast cancer diagnosed after enrolment. Median follow-up was 3.2 years. Breast density [interquartile range odds ratio (IQR-OR) 1.48, 95 % CI 1.34–1.63, AUC 0.59] was a slightly stronger univariate risk factor than the Tyrer-Cuzick model [IQR-OR 1.36 (95 % CI 1.25–1.48), O/E 60 % (95 % CI 44–74), AUC 0.57] or the Gail model [IQR-OR 1.22 (95 % CI 1.12–1.33), O/E 46 % (95 % CI 26–65 %), AUC 0.55]. It continued to add information after allowing for Tyrer-Cuzick [IQR-OR 1.47 (95 % CI 1.33–1.62), combined AUC 0.61] or Gail [IQR-OR 1.45 (95 % CI 1.32–1.60), combined AUC 0.59]. Conclusions Breast density may be usefully combined with the Tyrer-Cuzick model or the Gail model.

Excess weight at breast cancer diagnosis and weight gain during treatment are linked to increased breast cancer specific and all-cause mortality. The Breast—Activity and Healthy Eating After Diagnosis (B-AHEAD) trial tested 2 weight loss diet and exercise programmes versus a control receiving standard written advice during adjuvant treatment. This article identifies differences in characteristics between patients recruited from the main trial site to those of the whole population from that site during the recruitment period and identifies barriers to recruitment. A total of 409 patients with operable breast cancer were recruited within 12 weeks of surgery. We compared demographic and treatment factors between women recruited from the main trial coordinating site (n = 300) to the whole breast cancer population in the center (n = 532). Uptake at the coordinating site was 42%, comparable to treatment trials in the unit (47%). Women recruited were younger (55.9 vs 61.2 years, P < .001), more likely to live in least deprived postcode areas (41.7% vs 31.6%, P = .004), and more likely to have screen-detected cancers (55.3% vs 48.7%, P = .026) than the whole breast cancer population. The good uptake highlights the interest in lifestyle change around the time of diagnosis, a challenging time in the patient pathway, and shows that recruitment at this time is feasible. Barriers to uptake among older women and women with a lower socioeconomic status should be understood and overcome in order to improve recruitment to future lifestyle intervention programs.

Background We examined the utility of self-rated adherence to dietary and physical activity (PA) prescriptions as a method to monitor intervention compliance and facilitate goal setting during the Healthy Diet and Lifestyle Study (HDLS). In addition, we assessed participants’ feedback of HDLS. HDLS is a randomized pilot intervention that compared the effect of intermittent energy restriction combined with a Mediterranean diet (IER + MED) to a Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet, with matching PA regimens, for reducing visceral adipose tissue area (VAT). Methods Analyses included the 59 (98%) participants who completed at least 1 week of HDLS. Dietary and PA adherence scores were collected 8 times across 12 weeks, using a 0–10 scale (0 = not at all, 4 = somewhat, and 10 = following the plan very well). Adherence scores for each participant were averaged and assigned to high and low adherence categories using the group median (7.3 for diet, 7.1 for PA). Mean changes in VAT and weight from baseline to 12 weeks are reported by adherence level, overall and by randomization arm. Participants’ feedback at completion and 6 months post-intervention were examined. Results Mean ± SE, dietary adherence was 6.0 ± 0.2 and 8.2 ± 0.1, for the low and high adherence groups, respectively. For PA adherence, mean scores were 5.9 ± 0.2 and 8.5 ± 0.2, respectively. Compared to participants with low dietary adherence, those with high adherence lost significantly more VAT (22.9 ± 3.7 cm 2 vs. 11.7 ± 3.9 cm 2 [95% CI, − 22.1 to − 0.3]) and weight at week 12 (5.4 ± 0.8 kg vs. 3.5 ± 0.6 kg [95% CI, − 3.8 to − 0.0]). For PA, compared to participants with low adherence, those with high adherence lost significantly more VAT (22.3 ± 3.7 cm 2 vs. 11.6 ± 3.6 cm 2 [95% CI, − 20.7 to − 0.8]). Participants’ qualitative feedback of HDLS was positive and the most common response, on how to improve the study, was to provide cooking classes. Conclusions Results support the use of self-rated adherence as an effective method to monitor dietary and PA compliance and facilitate participant goal setting. Study strategies were found to be effective with promoting compliance to intervention prescriptions. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03639350 . Registered 21st August 2018—retrospectively registered.

Background We tested the hypothesis that body mass index (BMI) aged 20 years modifies the association of adult weight gain and breast cancer risk. Methods We recruited women (aged 47–73 years) into the PROCAS (Predicting Risk Of Cancer At Screening; Manchester, UK: 2009–2013) Study. In 47,042 women, we determined BMI at baseline and (by recall) at age 20 years, and derived weight changes. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for new breast cancer using Cox models and explored relationships between BMI aged 20 years, subsequent weight changes and breast cancer risk. Results With median follow-up of 5.6 years, 1142 breast cancers (post-menopausal at entry: 829) occurred. Among post-menopausal women at entry, BMI aged 20 years was inversely associated [HR per SD: 0.87 (95% CI: 0.79–0.95)], while absolute weight gain was associated with breast cancer [HR per SD:1.23 (95% CI: 1.14–1.32)]. For post-menopausal women who had a recall BMI aged 20 years <23.4 kg/m 2 (75th percentile), absolute weight gain was associated with breast cancer [HR per SD: 1.31 (95% CIs: 1.21–1.42)], but there were no associations for women with a recall BMI aged 20 years of >23.4 kg/m 2 ( P interaction values <0.05). Conclusions Adult weight gain increased post-menopausal breast cancer risk only among women who were <23.4 kg/m 2 aged 20 years.

Introduction: There are widespread moves to develop risk-stratified approaches to population-based breast screening. The public needs to favour receiving breast cancer risk information, which ideally should produce no detrimental effects. This study investigates risk perception, the proportion wishing to know their 10-year risk and whether subsequent screening attendance is affected. Methods: Fifty thousand women attending the NHS Breast Screening Programme completed a risk assessment questionnaire. Ten-year breast cancer risks were estimated using a validated algorithm (Tyrer-Cuzick) adjusted for visually assessed mammographic density. Women at high risk (⩾8%) and low risk (<1%) were invited for face-to-face or telephone risk feedback and counselling. Results: Of those invited to receive risk feedback, more high-risk women, 500 out of 673 (74.3%), opted to receive a consultation than low-risk women, 106 out of 193 (54.9%) ( P <0.001). Women at high risk were significantly more likely to perceive their risk as high ( P <0.001) and to attend their subsequent mammogram (94.4%) compared with low-risk women (84.2%; P =0.04) and all attendees (84.3%; ⩽ 0.0001). Conclusions: Population-based assessment of breast cancer risk is feasible. The majority of women wished to receive risk information. Perception of general population breast cancer risk is poor. There were no apparent adverse effects on screening attendance for high-risk women whose subsequent screening attendance was increased.

Intermittent energy restriction combined with a Mediterranean diet (IER+MED) has shown promise to reduce body fat and insulin resistance. In the Multiethnic Cohort Adiposity Phenotype Study, Japanese Americans had the highest visceral adipose tissue (VAT) when adjusting for total adiposity. We conducted this pilot study to demonstrate feasibility and explore efficacy of following IER+MED for 12 weeks to reduce VAT among East Asians in Hawaii. Sixty volunteers (aged 35–55, BMI 25–40 kg/m2, VAT ≥ 90 cm2 for men and ≥ 80 cm2 for women) were randomized to IER+MED (two consecutive days with 70% energy restriction and 5 days euenergetic MED) or an active comparator (euenergetic Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet). Participants and clinic staff (except dietitians) were blinded to group assignments. IER+MED had significantly larger reductions in DXA-measured VAT and total fat mass (−22.6 ± 3.6 cm2 and −3.3 ± 0.4 kg, respectively) vs. DASH (−10.7 ± 3.5 cm2 and −1.6 ± 0.4 kg) (p = 0.02 and p = 0.005). However, after adjusting for total fat mass, change in VAT was not statistically different between groups; whereas, improvement in alanine transaminase remained significantly greater for IER+MED vs. DASH (−16.2 ± 3.8 U/L vs. −4.0 ± 3.6 U/L, respectively, p = 0.02). Attrition rate was 10%, and participants adhered well to study prescriptions with no reported major adverse effect. Results demonstrate IER+MED is acceptable, lowers visceral and total adiposity among East Asian Americans, and may improve liver function more effectively than a healthful diet pattern. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03639350.

Background Observational studies suggest weight loss and energy restriction reduce breast cancer risk. Intermittent energy restriction (IER) reduces weight to the same extent as, or more than equivalent continuous energy restriction (CER) but the effects of IER on normal breast tissue and systemic metabolism as indicators of breast cancer risk are unknown. Methods We assessed the effect of IER (two days of 65 % energy restriction per week) for one menstrual cycle on breast tissue gene expression using Affymetrix GeneChips, adipocyte size by morphometry, and systemic metabolism (insulin resistance, lipids, serum and urine metabolites, lymphocyte gene expression) in 23 overweight premenopausal women at high risk of breast cancer. Unsupervised and supervised analyses of matched pre and post IER biopsies in 20 subjects were performed, whilst liquid and gas chromatography mass spectrometry assessed corresponding changes in serum and urine metabolites in all subjects after the two restricted and five unrestricted days of the IER. Results Women lost 4.8 % (±2.0 %) of body weight and 8.0 % (±5.0 %) of total body fat. Insulin resistance (homeostatic model assessment (HOMA)) reduced by 29.8 % (±17.8 %) on the restricted days and by 11 % (±34 %) on the unrestricted days of the IER. Five hundred and twenty-seven metabolites significantly increased or decreased during the two restricted days of IER. Ninety-one percent of these returned to baseline after 5 days of normal eating. Eleven subjects (55 %) displayed reductions in energy restriction-associated metabolic gene pathways including lipid synthesis, gluconeogenesis and glycogen synthesis. Some of these women also had increases in genes associated with breast epithelial cell differentiation (secretoglobulins, milk proteins and mucins) and decreased collagen synthesis (TNMD, PCOLCE2, TIMP4). There was no appreciable effect of IER on breast gene expression in the other nine subjects. These groups did not differ in the degree of changes in weight, total body fat, fat cell size or serum or urine metabolomic markers. Corresponding gene changes were not seen in peripheral blood lymphocytes. Conclusion The transcriptional response to IER is variable in breast tissue, which was not reflected in the systemic response, which occurred in all subjects. The mechanisms of breast responsiveness/non-responsiveness require further investigation. Trial registration ISRCTN77916487 31/07/2012.

Women at increased breast cancer (BC) risk are eligible for chemoprevention. Healthy lifestyles are potentially important for these women to improve efficacy and minimise side effects of chemoprevention and reduce the risk of BC and other lifestyle-related conditions. We investigated whether women taking chemoprevention adhere to healthy lifestyle recommendations, how their lifestyle risk factors and health measures compare to women in the general population, and whether these change whilst taking chemoprevention. Lifestyle risk factors and health measures in 136 premenopausal women taking tamoxifen for prevention of BC (Tam-Prev study) were compared to both national recommendations and an age-matched female population from the Health Survey for England 2012. The Tam-Prev population had high rates of overweight and obesity (59.2%) and low adherence to physical activity recommendations (30.6%) which were comparable to the general population (55.2 and 35.1%, respectively). Fewer Tam-Prev participants were current smokers (10.5 vs. 18.2%, P = 0.032), but more exceeded alcohol recommendations (45.0 vs. 18.7%, P < 0.001). Tam-Prev participants had suboptimal diets; proportions not meeting fibre, saturated fat and non-milk extrinsic sugar recommendations were 87.8, 64.9 and 21.4% respectively. Many Tam-Prev participants had markers of cardiovascular disease risk and the metabolic syndrome. Health behaviours did not change during the first year on tamoxifen. Women taking chemoprevention had a high prevalence of unhealthy lifestyle behaviours and health measures, similar to an age-matched English cohort. Improving these measures in women at increased BC risk could significantly decrease rates of BC and other noncommunicable diseases.

Weight gain is a common problem amongst women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer. We undertook a study to determine the causes of this weight gain. Prospective measurements of body mass and composition (skinfolds, bioelectrical impedance, total body potassium), energy balance (resting energy expenditure dietary intake, and physical activity), were determined in 17 women during and in the 6 months after commencing adjuvant chemotherapy. Women gained significant amounts of weight (5.0 +/- 3.8; p < 0.01) and body fat (7.1 kg +/- 4.5; p < 0.01) over the year. Waist circumference (5.1 +/- 4.5 cm; p < 0.01) and abdominal skinfold (16.2 +/- 10 mm; p < 0.01) were also increased but there was a decline in fat free mass (FFM); 1.7 +/- 2.5 kg. Women due to receive adjuvant chemotherapy had a greater resting energy expenditure (REE) compared with healthy subjects (n = 21); 100.5 +/- 8.0% Harris Benedict compared to 94.5 +/- 8.4% Harris Benedict (p = 0.05). REE declined by 3% during adjuvant chemotherapy (p < 0.05), and remained depressed until at least 3 months posttreatment. There were no significant changes in dietary intake or physical activity over the year. Failure of women to reduce their energy intake to compensate for the decreased energy requirement may account for some of the weight gain. Treatment of adjuvant chemotherapy causes gain of body fat because of reduced energy expenditure, and the failure of women to reduce their energy intake to compensate for the decline in energy requirement during and in the 6 months posttreatment. Since weight gain impacts on survival, patients should be counselled to reduce energy intake and exercise during and after adjuvant treatment.

Background: The problems of adherence to energy restriction in humans are well known. Objective: To compare the feasibility and effectiveness of intermittent continuous energy (IER) with continuous energy restriction (CER) for weight loss, insulin sensitivity and other metabolic disease risk markers. Design: Randomized comparison of a 25% energy restriction as IER (approximately 2710 kJ/day for 2 days/week) or CER (approximately 6276 kJ/day for 7 days/week) in 107 overweight or obese (mean (+/-s.d.) body mass index 30.6 (+/-5.1) kg m-2) premenopausal women observed over a period of 6 months. Weight, anthropometry, biomarkers for breast cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and dementia risk; insulin resistance (HOMA), oxidative stress markers, leptin, adiponectin, insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-1 and IGF binding proteins 1 and 2, androgens, prolactin, inflammatory markers (high sensitivity C-reactive protein and sialic acid), lipids, blood pressure and brain-derived neurotrophic factor were assessed at baseline and after 1, 3 and 6 months. Results: Last observation carried forward analysis showed that IER and CER are equally effective for weight loss: mean (95% confidence interval ) weight change for IER was -6.4 (-7.9 to -4.8) kg vs -5.6 (-6.9 to -4.4) kg for CER (P-value for difference between groups=0.4). Both groups experienced comparable reductions in leptin, free androgen index, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, total and LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure and increases in sex hormone binding globulin, IGF binding proteins 1 and 2. Reductions in fasting insulin and insulin resistance were modest in both groups, but greater with IER than with CER; difference between groups for fasting insulin was -1.2 (-1.4 to -1.0) micromoll-1 and for insulin resistance was -1.2 (-1.5 to -1.0) micromol-1 l-1 (both P=0.04). Conclusion: IER is as effective as CER with regard to weight loss, insulin sensitivity and other health biomarkers, and may be offered as an alternative equivalent to CER for weight loss and reducing disease risk.