Study protocol for "Moving bright, eating smart"- a phase 2 clinical trial on the acceptability and feasibility of a diet and physical activity intervention to prevent recurrence in colorectal cancer survivors

Background: Colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer and cancer-killer in Hong Kong with an alarming increasing incidence in recent years. The latest World Cancer Research Fund report concluded that foods low in fibre, and high in red and processed meat cause colorectal cancer whereas physical activity protects againstcolon cancer. Yet, the influence of these lifestyle factors on cancer outcome is largely unknown even though cancer survivors are eager for lifestyle modifications. Observational studies suggested that low intake of a Western-pattern diet and high physical activity level reduced colorectal cancer mortality. The Theory of PlannedBehaviour and the Health Action Process Approach have guided the design of intervention models targeting a wide range of health-related behaviours.Methods/design: We aim to demonstrate the feasibility of two behavioural interventions intended to improve colorectal cancer outcome and which are designed to increase physical activity level and reduce consumption of a Western-pattern diet. This three year study will be a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in a 2x2 factorialdesign comparing the “Moving Bright, Eating Smart” (physical activity and diet) programme against usual care. Subjects will be recruited over a 12-month period, undertake intervention for 12 months and followed up for a further 12 months. Baseline, interim and three post-intervention assessments will be conducted. Two hundred and twenty-two colorectal cancer patients who completed curative treatment without evidence of recurrence will be recruited into the study. Primary outcome measure will be whether physical activity and dietary targets are met at the end of the 12-month intervention. Secondary outcome measures include the magnitude andmechanism of behavioural change, the degree and determinants of compliance, and the additional health benefits and side effects of the intervention.Discussion: The results of this study will establish the feasibility of targeting the two behaviours (diet and physical activity) and demonstrate the magnitude of behaviour change. The information will facilitate the design of a further larger phase III randomised controlled trial with colorectal cancer outcome as the study endpoint to determine whether this intervention model would reduce colorectal cancer recurrence and mortality

Cancer Prevention with Resistant Starch in Lynch Syndrome Patients in the CAPP2-Randomized Placebo Controlled Trial : Planned 10-Year Follow-up

The CAPP2 trial investigated the long-term effects of aspirin and resistant starch on cancer incidence in patients with Lynch syndrome (LS). Participants with LS were randomized double-blind to 30 g resistant starch (RS) daily or placebo for up to 4 years. We present long-term cancer outcomes based on the planned 10-year follow-up from recruitment, supplemented by National Cancer Registry data to 20 years in England, Wales, and Finland. Overall, 463 participants received RS and 455 participants received placebo. After up to 20 years follow-up, there was no difference in colorectal cancer incidence (n = 52 diagnosed with colorectal cancer among those randomized to RS against n = 53 on placebo) but fewer participants had non-colorectal LS cancers in those randomized to RS (n = 27) compared with placebo (n = 48); intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis [HR, 0.54; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.33–0.86; P = 0.010]. In ITT analysis, allowing for multiple primary cancer diagnoses among participants by calculating incidence rate ratios (IRR) confirmed the protective effect of RS against non–colorectal cancer LS cancers (IRR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.32–0.84; P = 0.0075). These effects are particularly pronounced for cancers of the upper GI tract; 5 diagnoses in those on RS versus 21 diagnoses on placebo. The reduction in non–colorectal cancer LS cancers was detectable in the first 10 years and continued in the next decade. For colorectal cancer, ITT analysis showed no effect of RS on colorectal cancer risk (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.62–1.34; P = 0.63). There was no interaction between aspirin and RS treatments. In conclusion, 30 g daily RS appears to have a substantial protective effect against non–colorectal cancer cancers for patients with LS. Prevention Relevance: Regular bowel screening and aspirin reduce colorectal cancer among patients with LS but extracolonic cancers are difficult to detect and manage. This study suggests that RS reduces morbidity associated with extracolonic cancers.peerReviewe

Effect of aspirin or resistant starch on colorectal neoplasia in the Lynch syndrome

BACKGROUND: Observational and epidemiologic data indicate that the use of aspirin reduces the risk of colorectal neoplasia; however, the effects of aspirin in the Lynch syndrome (hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer) are not known. Resistant starch has been associated with an antineoplastic effect on the colon. METHODS: In a randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we used a two-by-two design to investigate the effects of aspirin, at a dose of 600 mg per day, and resistant starch (Novelose), at a dose of 30 g per day, in reducing the risk of adenoma and carcinoma among persons with the Lynch syndrome. RESULTS: Among 1071 persons in 43 centers, 62 were ineligible to participate in the study, 72 did not enter the study, and 191 withdrew from the study. These three categories were equally distributed across the study groups. Over a mean period of 29 months (range, 7 to 74), colonic adenoma or carcinoma developed in 141 participants. Of 693 participants randomly assigned to receive aspirin or placebo, neoplasia developed in 66 participants receiving aspirin (18.9%), as compared with 65 receiving placebo (19.0%) (relative risk, 1.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7 to 1.4). There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to the development of advanced neoplasia (7.4% and 9.9%, respectively; P = 0.33). Among the 727 participants receiving resistant starch or placebo, neoplasia developed in 67 participants receiving starch (18.7%), as compared with 68 receiving placebo (18.4%) (relative risk, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.7 to 1.4). Advanced adenomas and colorectal cancers were evenly distributed in the two groups. The prevalence of serious adverse events was low, and the events were evenly distributed. CONCLUSIONS: The use of aspirin, resistant starch, or both for up to 4 years has no effect on the incidence of colorectal adenoma or carcinoma among carriers of the Lynch syndrome. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN59521990.) Copyrigh

Clean technologies and environmental policy

BACKGROUND: Observational studies report that higher intake of dietary fibre (a heterogeneous mix including non-starch polysaccharides and resistant starches) is associated with reduced risk of colorectal cancer, but no randomised trials with prevention of colorectal cancer as a primary endpoint have been done. We assessed the effect of resistant starch on the incidence of colorectal cancer.METHODS: In the CAPP2 study, individuals with Lynch syndrome were randomly assigned in a two-by-two factorial design to receive 600 mg aspirin or aspirin placebo or 30 g resistant starch or starch placebo, for up to 4 years. Randomisation was done with a block size of 16. Post-intervention, patients entered into double-blind follow-up; participants and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint for this analysis was development of colorectal cancer in participants randomly assigned to resistant starch or resistant-starch placebo with both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. This study is registered, ISRCTN 59521990.FINDINGS: 463 patients were randomly assigned to receive resistant starch and 455 to receive resistant-starch placebo. At a median follow-up 52·7 months (IQR 28·9-78·4), 53 participants developed 61 primary colorectal cancers (27 of 463 participants randomly assigned to resistant starch, 26 of 455 participants assigned to resistant-starch placebo). Intention-to-treat analysis of time to first colorectal cancer showed a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·40 (95% CI 0·78-2·56; p=0·26) and Poisson regression accounting for multiple primary events gave an incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 1·15 (95% CI 0·66-2·00; p=0·61). For those completing 2 years of intervention, per-protocol analysis yielded a HR of 1·09 (0·55-2·19, p=0·80) and an IRR of 0·98 (0·51-1·88, p=0·95). No information on adverse events was gathered during post-intervention follow-up.INTERPRETATION: Resistant starch had no detectable effect on cancer development in carriers of hereditary colorectal cancer. Dietary supplementation with resistant starch does not emulate the apparently protective effect of diets rich in dietary fibre against colorectal cancer.FUNDING: European Union, Cancer Research UK, Bayer Corporation, National Starch and Chemical Co, UK Medical Research Council, Newcastle Hospitals Trustees, Cancer Council of Victoria Australia, THRIPP South Africa, The Finnish Cancer Foundation, SIAK Switzerland, and Bayer Pharma

Cancer prevention with aspirin in hereditary colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome), 10-year follow-up and registry-based 20-year data in the CAPP2 study: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

Background: Lynch syndrome is associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer and with a broader spectrum of cancers, especially endometrial cancer. In 2011, our group reported long-term cancer outcomes (mean follow-up 55·7 months [SD 31·4]) for participants with Lynch syndrome enrolled into a randomised trial of daily aspirin versus placebo. This report completes the planned 10-year follow-up to allow a longer-term assessment of the effect of taking regular aspirin in this high-risk population. Methods: In the double-blind, randomised CAPP2 trial, 861 patients from 43 international centres worldwide (707 [82%] from Europe, 112 [13%] from Australasia, 38 [4%] from Africa, and four [&lt;1%] from The Americas) with Lynch syndrome were randomly assigned to receive 600 mg aspirin daily or placebo. Cancer outcomes were monitored for at least 10 years from recruitment with English, Finnish, and Welsh participants being monitored for up to 20 years. The primary endpoint was development of colorectal cancer. Analysis was by intention to treat and per protocol. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN59521990. Findings: Between January, 1999, and March, 2005, 937 eligible patients with Lynch syndrome, mean age 45 years, commenced treatment, of whom 861 agreed to be randomly assigned to the aspirin group or placebo; 427 (50%) participants received aspirin and 434 (50%) placebo. Participants were followed for a mean of 10 years approximating 8500 person-years. 40 (9%) of 427 participants who received aspirin developed colorectal cancer compared with 58 (13%) of 434 who received placebo. Intention-to-treat Cox proportional hazards analysis revealed a significantly reduced hazard ratio (HR) of 0·65 (95% CI 0·43–0·97; p=0·035) for aspirin versus placebo. Negative binomial regression to account for multiple primary events gave an incidence rate ratio of 0·58 (0·39–0·87; p=0·0085). Per-protocol analyses restricted to 509 who achieved 2 years' intervention gave an HR of 0·56 (0·34–0·91; p=0·019) and an incidence rate ratio of 0·50 (0·31–0·82; p=0·0057). Non-colorectal Lynch syndrome cancers were reported in 36 participants who received aspirin and 36 participants who received placebo. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses showed no effect. For all Lynch syndrome cancers combined, the intention-to-treat analysis did not reach significance but per-protocol analysis showed significantly reduced overall risk for the aspirin group (HR=0·63, 0·43–0·92; p=0·018). Adverse events during the intervention phase between aspirin and placebo groups were similar, and no significant difference in compliance between intervention groups was observed for participants with complete intervention phase data; details reported previously. Interpretation: The case for prevention of colorectal cancer with aspirin in Lynch syndrome is supported by our results. Funding: Cancer Research UK, European Union, MRC, NIHR, Bayer Pharma AG, Barbour Foundation.</p