Associations between food group intakes and circulating insulin‑like growth factor‑I in the UK Biobank: a cross‑sectional analysis

Purpose Circulating insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) concentrations have been positively associated with risk of several common cancers and inversely associated with risk of bone fractures. Intakes of some foods have been associated with increased circulating IGF-I concentrations; however, evidence remains inconclusive. Our aim was to assess cross-sectional associations of food group intakes with circulating IGF-I concentrations in the UK Biobank. Methods At recruitment, the UK Biobank participants reported their intake of commonly consumed foods. From these questions, intakes of total vegetables, fresh fruit, red meat, processed meat, poultry, oily fish, non-oily fish, and cheese were estimated. Serum IGF-I concentrations were measured in blood samples collected at recruitment. After exclusions, a total of 438,453 participants were included in this study. Multivariable linear regression was used to assess the associations of food group intakes with circulating IGF-I concentrations. Results Compared to never consumers, participants who reported consuming oily fish or non-oily fish ≥ 2 times/week had 1.25 nmol/L (95% confidence interval:1.19–1.31) and 1.16 nmol/L (1.08–1.24) higher IGF-I concentrations, respectively. Participants who reported consuming poultry ≥ 2 times/week had 0.87 nmol/L (0.80–0.94) higher IGF-I concentrations than those who reported never consuming poultry. There were no strong associations between other food groups and IGF-I concentrations. Conclusions We found positive associations between oily and non-oily fish intake and circulating IGF-I concentrations. A weaker positive association of IGF-I with poultry intake was also observed. Further research is needed to understand the mechanisms which might explain these associations.Nuffield Department of Population Health Doctor of Philosophy student scholarshipCancer Research UK C8221/A29017Clarendon Scholarship from the University of OxfordNuffield Department of Population Health Intermediate FellowshipUK Research & Innovation (UKRI)Medical Research Council UK (MRC) MR/M012190/1Thames Valley NIHR Applied Research CentreSpanish Government Spanish State Plan for Scientific and Technical Research and Innovation RYC2020-028818-IGirdlers' New Zealand Health Research Council Fellowship 19/031Wellcome TrustOur Planet Our Health (Livestock, Environment and People -LEAP) 205212/Z/16/ZCancer Research UK Population Research Fellowship C60192/A28516World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF UK), as part of the Word Cancer Research Fund International grant programme 2019/195

Genetic predisposition to metabolically unfavourable adiposity and prostate cancer risk:A Mendelian randomization analysis

BACKGROUND The associations of adiposity with aggressive prostate cancer risk are unclear. Using two-sample Mendelian randomization, we assessed the association of metabolically unfavourable adiposity (UFA), favourable adiposity (FA) and for comparison body mass index (BMI), with prostate cancer, including aggressive prostate cancer. METHODS We examined the association of these genetically predicted adiposity-related traits with risk of prostate cancer overall, aggressive and early onset disease using outcome summary statistics from the PRACTICAL consortium (including 15,167 aggressive cases). RESULTS In inverse-variance weighted models, there was little evidence that genetically predicted one standard deviation higher UFA, FA and BMI were associated with aggressive prostate cancer [OR: 0.85 (95% CI:0.61-1.19), 0.80 (0.53-1.23) and 0.97 (0.88-1.08), respectively]; these associations were largely consistent in sensitivity analyses accounting for horizontal pleiotropy. There was no strong evidence that genetically determined UFA, FA or BMI were associated with overall prostate cancer or early age of onset prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS We did not find differences in the associations of UFA and FA with prostate cancer risk, which suggest that adiposity is unlikely to influence prostate cancer via the metabolic factors assessed; however, these did not cover some aspects related to metabolic health that may link obesity with aggressive prostate cancer, which should be explored in future studies

A pre-post evaluation of oncology healthcare providers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices following the implementation of a complementary medicine practice guideline.

Purpose Complementary medicine (CM) use is prevalent among cancer patients, yet it is often not assessed by oncology healthcare providers (HCPs). The purpose of this study was to evaluate oncology HCPs’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices surrounding CM use before and after the implementation of a practice guideline focusing on standardizing assessment and documentation of CM. Methods Oncology HCPs across a provincial cancer agency were invited to participate in the study. The implementation strategy included an initial education session for HCPs and standardized CM assessment forms. Pre-post surveys assessing knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to CM were completed by HCPs prior to attending the education session and following the 4-month implementation period. Paired t-tests were conducted to determine differences between baseline and follow-up surveys. Results A total of 31 oncology HCPs completed both baseline and follow-up surveys, with over 3700 patient CM assessment forms being completed during the 4-month study period. At the end of the study, HCPs reported greater CM knowledge (p  Conclusion Implementing a practice guideline, including a CM education session and a standardized assessment form, was found to improve oncology HCPs’ self-reported CM knowledge and readiness to answer cancer patients’ questions about CM. The findings provide support for future knowledge translation research aimed at standardizing how CM is addressed within cancer care settings

Addressing complementary and alternative medicine use among individuals with cancer: an integrative review and clinical practice guideline

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use is common among individuals with cancer, but many choose not to discuss CAM with health-care providers (HCPs). Moreover, there is variability in the provision of evidence-informed decision making about CAM use. A clinical practice guideline was developed to standardize how oncology HCPs address CAM use as well as to inform how individuals with cancer can be supported in making evidence-informed decisions about CAM. An integrative review of the literature, from inception to December 31, 2018, was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and AMED databases. Eligible articles included oncology HCPs' practice related to discussing, assessing, documenting, providing decision support, or offering information about CAM. Two authors independently searched the literature, and selected articles were summarized. Recommendations for clinical practice were formulated from the appraised evidence and clinical experiences of the research team. An expert panel reviewed the guideline for usability and appropriateness and recommendations were finalized. The majority of the 30 studies eligible for inclusion were either observational or qualitative, with only 3 being reviews and 3 being experimental. From the literature, 7 practice recommendations were formulated for oncology HCPs regarding how to address CAM use by individuals with cancer, including communicating, assessing, educating, decision coaching, documenting, active monitoring, and adverse event reporting. It is imperative for safe and comprehensive care that oncology HCPs address CAM use as part of standard practice. This clinical practice guideline offers directions on how to support evidence-informed decision making about CAM among individuals with cancer

Development of the SPARK family member web pages to improve symptom management for pediatric patients receiving cancer treatments

Abstract Background Supportive care Prioritization, Assessment and Recommendations for Kids (SPARK) is a web-based application that facilitates symptom screening and access to supportive care clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for children and adolescents receiving cancer treatments. Objective was to develop SPARK family member web pages for pediatric patient family members accessing: (1) proxy symptom screening and symptom reports, and (2) care recommendations for symptom management based on CPGs. Methods SPARK family member web pages were developed and included access to symptom screening and care recommendations sections. Care recommendations for fatigue and mucositis were created. These were iteratively refined based upon cognitive interviews with English-speaking family members ≥16 years of age until less than two participants incorrectly understood sections as adjudicated by two independent raters. Results A total of 100 family members were enrolled who evaluated the SPARK family member web pages (n = 40), fatigue care recommendation (n = 30) and mucositis prevention care recommendation (n = 30). Among the last 10 participants, none said that the SPARK family member web pages were hard or very hard to use, one incorrectly understood one web page, none said either care recommendation was hard to understand and none were incorrect in their understanding of the care recommendations. Conclusions We successfully developed SPARK web pages for use by family members of pediatric patients receiving cancer treatments. We also developed a process for translating CPG recommendations designed for healthcare professionals to lay language. The utility of SPARK family member web pages after clinical implementation could be a focus for future research

Associations between food group intakes and circulating insulin-like growth factor-I in the UK Biobank: a cross-sectional analysis

Purpose: Circulating insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) concentrations have been positively associated with risk of several common cancers and inversely associated with risk of bone fractures. Intakes of some foods have been associated with increased circulating IGF-I concentrations; however, evidence remains inconclusive. Our aim was to assess cross-sectional associations of food group intakes with circulating IGF-I concentrations in the UK Biobank. Methods: At recruitment, the UK Biobank participants reported their intake of commonly consumed foods. From these questions, intakes of total vegetables, fresh fruit, red meat, processed meat, poultry, oily fish, non-oily fish, and cheese were estimated. Serum IGF-I concentrations were measured in blood samples collected at recruitment. After exclusions, a total of 438,453 participants were included in this study. Multivariable linear regression was used to assess the associations of food group intakes with circulating IGF-I concentrations. Results: Compared to never consumers, participants who reported consuming oily fish or non-oily fish ≥ 2 times/week had 1.25 nmol/L (95% confidence interval:1.19–1.31) and 1.16 nmol/L (1.08–1.24) higher IGF-I concentrations, respectively. Participants who reported consuming poultry ≥ 2 times/week had 0.87 nmol/L (0.80–0.94) higher IGF-I concentrations than those who reported never consuming poultry. There were no strong associations between other food groups and IGF-I concentrations. Conclusions: We found positive associations between oily and non-oily fish intake and circulating IGF-I concentrations. A weaker positive association of IGF-I with poultry intake was also observed. Further research is needed to understand the mechanisms which might explain these associations