Burden Sorrel, Sremanakova Jana, Jones Debra, Todd Chris
School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.
Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford M6 8HD, UK.
Proc Nutr Soc. 2019 Feb;78(1):135-145. doi: 10.1017/S0029665118002690. Epub 2018 Dec 19.
This review evaluates evidence on dietary interventions for cancer survivors giving an overview of people's views and preferences for service attributes and provides a narrative review. After cancer, people often want to change their diet and there is a plethora of evidence why dietary optimisation would be beneficial. However, cancer survivors have different preferences about attributes of services including: place, person and communication mode. Randomised control trials have been reviewed to provide a narrative summary of evidence of dietary interventions. Most studies were on survivors of breast cancer, with a few on colorectal, prostate and gynaecological survivors. Telephone interventions were the most frequently reported means of providing advice and dietitians were most likely to communicate advice. Dietary assessment methods used were FFQ, food diaries and 24-h recalls. Dietary interventions were shown to increase intake of fruit and vegetables, dietary fibre, and improve diet quality in some studies but with contradictory findings in others. Telephone advice increased fruit and vegetable intake primarily in women with breast cancer and at some time points in people after colorectal cancer, but findings were inconsistent. Findings from mail interventions were contradictory, although diet quality improved in some studies. Web-based and group sessions had limited benefits. There is some evidence that dietary interventions improve diet quality and some aspects of nutritional intake in cancer survivors. However, due to contradictory findings between studies and cancer sites, short term follow-up and surrogate endpoints it is difficult to decipher the evidence base.
本综述评估了癌症幸存者饮食干预的相关证据，概述了人们对服务属性的看法和偏好，并进行了叙述性综述。患癌后，人们通常希望改变饮食，而且有大量证据表明饮食优化有益。然而，癌症幸存者对服务属性有不同偏好，包括地点、人员和沟通方式。已对随机对照试验进行了综述，以提供饮食干预证据的叙述性总结。大多数研究针对乳腺癌幸存者，少数针对结直肠癌、前列腺癌和妇科癌症幸存者。电话干预是最常报告的提供建议的方式，营养师最有可能传达建议。使用的饮食评估方法有食物频率问卷、饮食日记和24小时回忆法。在一些研究中，饮食干预显示可增加水果和蔬菜、膳食纤维的摄入量，并改善饮食质量，但其他研究结果相互矛盾。电话建议主要增加了乳腺癌女性以及结直肠癌患者在某些时间点的水果和蔬菜摄入量，但结果并不一致。邮件干预的结果相互矛盾，尽管在一些研究中饮食质量有所改善。基于网络的干预和小组会议的益处有限。有一些证据表明饮食干预可改善癌症幸存者的饮食质量和营养摄入的某些方面。然而，由于研究之间、癌症部位之间结果相互矛盾，随访时间短以及替代终点等问题，很难解读证据基础。
