Testing a breast cancer prevention and a multiple disease prevention weight loss programme amongst women within the UK NHS breast screening programme-a randomised feasibility study

Advice after urgent suspected cancer referral when cancer is not found in England: Survey of patients' preferences and perceived acceptability

Objective

No standardised approach exists to provide advice after urgent suspected cancer (USC) referral when cancer is not found. This study aimed to assess preferences and acceptability of receiving advice after USC referral related to: 1) managing ongoing symptoms, 2) responding to early symptoms of other cancers, 3) cancer screening, 4) reducing risks of future cancer.

Methods

2,541 patients from two English NHS Trusts were mailed a survey 1-3 months after having no cancer found following urgent suspected gastrointestinal or head and neck cancer referral. Participants were asked about: willingness to receive advice; prospective acceptability; preferences related to mode, timing and who should provide advice; and previous advice receipt.

Results

406 patients responded (16.0%) with 397 in the final analyses. Few participants had previously received advice, yet most were willing to. Willingness varied by type of advice: fewer were willing to receive advice about early symptoms of other cancers (88.9%) than advice related to ongoing symptoms (94.3%). Acceptability was relatively high for all advice types. Reducing the risk of future cancer advice was more acceptable. Acceptability was lower in those from ethnic minority groups, and with lower levels of education. Most participants preferred to receive advice from a doctor; with results or soon after; either face to face or via the telephone.

Conclusions

There is a potential unmet need for advice after USC referral when no cancer is found. Equitable intervention design should focus on increasing acceptability for people from ethnic minority groups and those with lower levels of education.

Effects of Functional and Nutraceutical Foods in the Context of the Mediterranean Diet in Patients Diagnosed with Breast Cancer

Several studies report that breast cancer survivors (BCS) tend to have a poor diet, as fruit, vegetable, and legume consumption is often reduced, resulting in a decreased intake of nutraceuticals. Moreover, weight gain has been commonly described among BCS during treatment, increasing recurrence rate and mortality. Improving lifestyle and nutrition after the diagnosis of BC may have important benefits on patients' general health and on specific clinical outcomes. The Mediterranean diet (MD), known for its multiple beneficial effects on health, can be considered a nutritional pool comprising several nutraceuticals: bioactive compounds and foods with anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects. Recent scientific advances have led to the identification of nutraceuticals that could amplify the benefits of the MD and favorably influence gene expression in these patients. Nutraceuticals could have beneficial effects in the postdiagnostic phase of BC, including helping to mitigate the adverse effects of chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Moreover, the MD could be a valid and easy-to-follow option for managing excess weight. The aim of this narrative review is to evaluate the recent scientific literature on the possible beneficial effects of consuming functional and nutraceutical foods in the framework of MD in BCS.

What do women think about having received their breast cancer risk as part of a risk-stratified NHS Breast Screening Programme? A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Risk-stratified screening is being considered for national breast screening programmes. It is unclear how women experience risk-stratified screening and receipt of breast cancer risk information in real time. This study aimed to explore the psychological impact of undergoing risk-stratified screening within England's NHS Breast Screening Programme.

METHODS

Individual telephone interviews were conducted with 40 women who participated in the BC-Predict study and received a letter indicating their estimated breast cancer risk as one of four risk categories: low (<2% 10-year risk), average (2-4.99%), above average (moderate; 5-7.99%) or high (≥8%). Audio-recorded interview transcriptions were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Two themes were produced: 'From risk expectations to what's my future health story?' highlights that women overall valued the opportunity to receive risk estimates; however, when these were discordant with perceived risk, this causes temporary distress or rejection of the information. 'Being a good (woman) citizen' where women felt positive contributing to society but may feel judged if they then cannot exert agency over the management of their risk or access follow-up support CONCLUSIONS: Risk-stratified breast screening was generally accepted without causing long-lasting distress; however, issues related to risk communication and access to care pathways need to be considered for implementation.

Randomised controlled trial of breast cancer and multiple disease prevention weight loss programmes vs written advice amongst women attending a breast cancer family history clinic

BACKGROUND

Overweight and obesity are common amongst women attending breast cancer Family History, Risk and Prevention Clinics (FHRPCs). Overweight increases risk of breast cancer (BC) and conditions including¹ cardiovascular disease (CVD) and type-2 diabetes (T2D). Clinics provide written health behaviour advice with is likely to have minimal effects. We assessed efficacy of two remotely delivered weight loss programmes vs. written advice.

METHOD

210 women with overweight or obesity attending three UK FHRPCs were randomised to either a BC prevention programme (BCPP) framed to reduce risk of BC (n = 86), a multiple disease prevention programme (MDPP) framed to reduce risk of BC, CVD and T2D (n = 87), or written advice (n = 37). Change in weight and health behaviours were assessed at 12-months.

RESULTS

Weight loss at 12 months was -6.3% (-8.2, -4.5) in BCPP, -6.0% (-7.9, -4.2) in MDPP and -3.3% (-6.2, -0.5) in the written group (p = 0.451 across groups). The percentage losing ≥10% weight in these groups were respectively 34%, 23% and 14% (p = 0.038 across groups).

DISCUSSION

BCPP and MDPP programmes resulted in more women achieving ≥10% weight loss, but no evidence of additional benefits of MDPP. A multicentre RCT to test the BCPP across UK FHRPCs is warranted. Clinical Trial Registration ISRCTN16431108.

The Second Nutrition and Cancer Networking Meeting Nutrition and Breast Cancer: Translating Evidence into Practice

The 2^nd Nutrition and Cancer Networking Meeting 'Nutrition and Breast Cancer: Translating Evidence into Practice' was held at Newcastle University in May 2022, with support from the Nutrition Society and British Association for Cancer Research. The first meeting in this series was held in Sheffield in 2019. The aim of this joint meeting was to bring together researchers with an interest in nutrition and breast cancer, with the programme spanning topics from risk and prevention to nutrition during treatment and beyond. Several key themes emerged, including the importance of engaging patients in the development of interventions and trials, making trials more accessible to diverse communities; training of clinical staff in nutrition and latest evidence; wider range of compounds should be considered in food composition tables; and alternative trial designs can be considered for prevention research to reduce financial burden and increase power.

How do women who are informed that they are at increased risk of breast cancer appraise their risk? A systematic review of qualitative research

This review aimed to synthesise qualitative research on how women notified that they are at increased risk of breast cancer view their risk. Five electronic databases were systematically reviewed for qualitative research investigating how women who have received an increased breast cancer risk estimate appraise their risk status. Fourteen records reporting 12 studies were included and critically appraised. Data were thematically synthesised. Four analytical themes were generated. Women appraise their risk of breast cancer through comparison with their risk of other familial diseases. Clinically derived risk estimates were understood in relation to pre-conceived risk appraisals, with incongruences met with surprise. Family history is relied upon strongly, with women exploring similarities and differences in attributes between themselves and affected relatives to gauge the likelihood of diagnosis. Women at increased risk reported living under a cloud of inevitability or uncertainty regarding diagnosis, resulting in concerns about risk management. Women hold stable appraisals of their breast cancer risk which appear to be mainly formed through their experiences of breast cancer in the family. Healthcare professionals should explore women's personal risk appraisals prior to providing clinically derived risk estimates in order to address misconceptions, reduce concerns about inevitability and increase perceived control over risk reduction.

Implementing Risk-Stratified Breast Screening in England: An Agenda Setting Meeting

It is now possible to accurately assess breast cancer risk at routine NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) appointments, provide risk feedback and offer risk management strategies to women at higher risk. These strategies include National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) approved additional breast screening and risk-reducing medication. However, the NHSBSP invites nearly all women three-yearly, regardless of risk. In March 2022, a one-day agenda setting meeting took place in Manchester to discuss the feasibility and desirability of implementation of risk-stratified screening in the NHSBSP. Fifty-eight individuals participated (38 face-to-face, 20 virtual) with relevant expertise from academic, clinical and/or policy-making perspectives. Key findings were presented from the PROCAS2 NIHR programme grant regarding feasibility of risk-stratified screening in the NHSBSP. Participants discussed key uncertainties in seven groups, followed by a plenary session. Discussions were audio-recorded and thematically analysed to produce descriptive themes. Five themes were developed: (i) risk and health economic modelling; (ii) health inequalities and communication with women; (iii); extending screening intervals for low-risk women; (iv) integration with existing NHSBSP; and (v) potential new service models. Most attendees expected some form of risk-stratified breast screening to be implemented in England and collectively identified key issues to be resolved to facilitate this.