癌症饮食干预:所有随机对照试验的系统性回顾。

IF 9.9 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1093/jnci/djae051
Nosakhare Paul Ilerhunmwuwa, Abul Hasan Shadali Abdul Khader, Calvin Smith, Edward R Scheffer Cliff, Christopher M Booth, Evevanne Hottel, Muhammad Aziz, Wade Lee-Smith, Aaron Goodman, Rajshekhar Chakraborty, Ghulam Rehman Mohyuddin
{"title":"癌症饮食干预:所有随机对照试验的系统性回顾。","authors":"Nosakhare Paul Ilerhunmwuwa, Abul Hasan Shadali Abdul Khader, Calvin Smith, Edward R Scheffer Cliff, Christopher M Booth, Evevanne Hottel, Muhammad Aziz, Wade Lee-Smith, Aaron Goodman, Rajshekhar Chakraborty, Ghulam Rehman Mohyuddin","doi":"10.1093/jnci/djae051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prior systematic reviews addressing the impact of diet on cancer outcomes have focused on specific dietary interventions. In this systematic review, we assessed all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating dietary interventions for cancer patients, examining the range of interventions, endpoints, patient populations, and results.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review identified all RCTs conducted before January 2023 testing dietary interventions in patients with cancer. Assessed outcomes included quality of life, functional outcomes, clinical cancer measurements (eg, progression-free survival, response rates), overall survival, and translational endpoints (eg, inflammatory markers).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 252 RCTs were identified involving 31 067 patients. The median sample size was 71 (interquartile range 41 to 118), and 80 (32%) studies had a sample size greater than 100. Most trials (n = 184, 73%) were conducted in the adjuvant setting. Weight or body composition and translational endpoints were the most common primary endpoints (n = 64, 25%; n = 52, 21%, respectively). Direct cancer measurements and overall survival were primary endpoints in 20 (8%) and 7 (3%) studies, respectively. Eight trials with a primary endpoint of cancer measurement (40%) met their endpoint. Large trials in colon (n = 1429), breast (n = 3088), and prostate cancer (n = 478) each showed no effect of dietary interventions on endpoints measuring cancer.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most RCTs of dietary interventions in cancer are small and measure nonclinical endpoints. Although only a small number of large RCTs have been conducted to date, these trials have not shown an improvement in cancer outcomes. Currently, there is limited evidence to support dietary interventions as a therapeutic tool in cancer care.</p>","PeriodicalId":14809,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11223872/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dietary interventions in cancer: a systematic review of all randomized controlled trials.\",\"authors\":\"Nosakhare Paul Ilerhunmwuwa, Abul Hasan Shadali Abdul Khader, Calvin Smith, Edward R Scheffer Cliff, Christopher M Booth, Evevanne Hottel, Muhammad Aziz, Wade Lee-Smith, Aaron Goodman, Rajshekhar Chakraborty, Ghulam Rehman Mohyuddin\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jnci/djae051\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prior systematic reviews addressing the impact of diet on cancer outcomes have focused on specific dietary interventions. In this systematic review, we assessed all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating dietary interventions for cancer patients, examining the range of interventions, endpoints, patient populations, and results.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review identified all RCTs conducted before January 2023 testing dietary interventions in patients with cancer. Assessed outcomes included quality of life, functional outcomes, clinical cancer measurements (eg, progression-free survival, response rates), overall survival, and translational endpoints (eg, inflammatory markers).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 252 RCTs were identified involving 31 067 patients. The median sample size was 71 (interquartile range 41 to 118), and 80 (32%) studies had a sample size greater than 100. Most trials (n = 184, 73%) were conducted in the adjuvant setting. Weight or body composition and translational endpoints were the most common primary endpoints (n = 64, 25%; n = 52, 21%, respectively). Direct cancer measurements and overall survival were primary endpoints in 20 (8%) and 7 (3%) studies, respectively. Eight trials with a primary endpoint of cancer measurement (40%) met their endpoint. Large trials in colon (n = 1429), breast (n = 3088), and prostate cancer (n = 478) each showed no effect of dietary interventions on endpoints measuring cancer.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most RCTs of dietary interventions in cancer are small and measure nonclinical endpoints. Although only a small number of large RCTs have been conducted to date, these trials have not shown an improvement in cancer outcomes. Currently, there is limited evidence to support dietary interventions as a therapeutic tool in cancer care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14809,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11223872/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djae051\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djae051","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:之前针对饮食对癌症预后影响的系统性综述主要集中在特定的饮食干预措施上。在本系统综述中,我们评估了所有调查癌症患者饮食干预的 RCT,研究了干预的范围、终点、患者人群和结果:本系统综述确定了 2023 年 1 月之前进行的所有 RCT,这些 RCT 测试了癌症患者的饮食干预措施。评估的结果包括生活质量、功能性结果、临床癌症测量(如无进展生存期、反应率)、总生存期和转化终点(如炎症标志物)。样本量中位数为71(四分位数间距为41至118),80项(32%)研究的样本量超过100。大多数试验(n = 184,73%)都是在辅助治疗的情况下进行的。体重/身体成分和转化终点是最常见的主要终点(分别为64项,占25%;52项,占21%)。分别有 20 项(8%)和 7 项(3%)研究将直接癌症测量和总生存率作为主要终点。有 8 项试验的主要终点是癌症测量(40%)达到了终点要求。针对结肠癌(n = 1429)、乳腺癌(n = 3088)和前列腺癌(n = 478)的大型试验均显示,饮食干预对癌症测量终点没有影响:结论:大多数针对癌症的饮食干预研究都规模较小,且测量的是非临床终点。尽管迄今为止只进行了少量大型研究性临床试验,但这些试验并未显示癌症预后有所改善。目前,支持将饮食干预作为癌症治疗工具的证据有限。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Dietary interventions in cancer: a systematic review of all randomized controlled trials.

Background: Prior systematic reviews addressing the impact of diet on cancer outcomes have focused on specific dietary interventions. In this systematic review, we assessed all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating dietary interventions for cancer patients, examining the range of interventions, endpoints, patient populations, and results.

Methods: This systematic review identified all RCTs conducted before January 2023 testing dietary interventions in patients with cancer. Assessed outcomes included quality of life, functional outcomes, clinical cancer measurements (eg, progression-free survival, response rates), overall survival, and translational endpoints (eg, inflammatory markers).

Results: In total, 252 RCTs were identified involving 31 067 patients. The median sample size was 71 (interquartile range 41 to 118), and 80 (32%) studies had a sample size greater than 100. Most trials (n = 184, 73%) were conducted in the adjuvant setting. Weight or body composition and translational endpoints were the most common primary endpoints (n = 64, 25%; n = 52, 21%, respectively). Direct cancer measurements and overall survival were primary endpoints in 20 (8%) and 7 (3%) studies, respectively. Eight trials with a primary endpoint of cancer measurement (40%) met their endpoint. Large trials in colon (n = 1429), breast (n = 3088), and prostate cancer (n = 478) each showed no effect of dietary interventions on endpoints measuring cancer.

Conclusion: Most RCTs of dietary interventions in cancer are small and measure nonclinical endpoints. Although only a small number of large RCTs have been conducted to date, these trials have not shown an improvement in cancer outcomes. Currently, there is limited evidence to support dietary interventions as a therapeutic tool in cancer care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
203
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the National Cancer Institute is a reputable publication that undergoes a peer-review process. It is available in both print (ISSN: 0027-8874) and online (ISSN: 1460-2105) formats, with 12 issues released annually. The journal's primary aim is to disseminate innovative and important discoveries in the field of cancer research, with specific emphasis on clinical, epidemiologic, behavioral, and health outcomes studies. Authors are encouraged to submit reviews, minireviews, and commentaries. The journal ensures that submitted manuscripts undergo a rigorous and expedited review to publish scientifically and medically significant findings in a timely manner.
期刊最新文献
Enhancing Capacity for Primary Care Research in Cancer Survivorship: National Cancer Institute Meeting Report. Expression of Concern: Delta-Like Ligand 4-Notch Blockade and Tumor Radiation Response. The Diverse Aspects of Uterine Serous Cancer: An NCI workshop on the status of and opportunities for advancement of research. Expression of Concern: Critical Role for Fas-Associated Death Domain-Like Interleukin-1-Converting Enzyme-Like Inhibitory Protein in Anoikis Resistance and Distant Tumor Formation. Comparing characteristics of individuals screened for lung cancer with 2021 vs 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1