Connecting the dots between breast cancer, obesity and alcohol consumption in middle-aged women: ecological and case control studies.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer (BC) incidence in Australian women aged 45 to 64 years ('middle-aged') has tripled in the past 50 years, along with increasing alcohol consumption and obesity in middle-age women. Alcohol and obesity have been individually associated with BC but little is known about how these factors might interact. Chronic psychological stress has been associated with, but not causally linked to, BC. Here, alcohol could represent the 'missing link' - reflecting self-medication. Using an exploratory cross-sectional design, we investigated inter-correlations of alcohol intake and overweight/obesity and their association with BC incidence in middle-aged women. We also explored the role of stress and various lifestyle factors in these relationships. METHODS: We analysed population data on BC incidence, alcohol consumption, overweight/obesity, and psychological stress. A case control study was conducted using an online survey. Cases (n = 80) were diagnosed with BC and controls (n = 235) were women in the same age range with no BC history. Participants reported lifestyle data (including alcohol consumption, weight history) over consecutive 10-year life periods. Data were analysed using a range of bivariate and multivariate techniques including correlation matrices, multivariate binomial regressions and multilevel logistic regression. RESULTS: Ecological inter-correlations were found between BC and alcohol consumption and between BC and obesity but not between other variables in the matrix. Strong pairwise correlations were found between stress and alcohol and between stress and obesity. BMI tended to be higher in cases relative to controls across reported life history. Alcohol consumption was not associated with case-control status. Few correlations were found between lifestyle factors and stress, although smoking and alcohol consumption were correlated in some periods. Obesity occurring during the ages of 31 to 40 years emerged as an independent predictor of BC (OR 3.5 95% CI: 1.3-9.4). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides ecological evidence correlating obesity and alcohol consumption with BC incidence. Case-control findings suggest lifetime BMI may be important with particular risk associated with obesity prior to 40 years of age. Stress was ecologically linked to alcohol and obesity but not to BC incidence and was differentially correlated with alcohol and smoking among cases and controls. Our findings support prevention efforts targeting weight in women below 40 years of age and, potentially, lifelong alcohol consumption to reduce BC risk in middle-aged women.

Cancer survivorship monitoring systems for the collection of patient-reported outcomes: a systematic narrative review of international approaches.

PURPOSE: This systematic narrative review describes and compares the development and operational approaches of monitoring systems without a clinical care component that collect patient-reported outcome (PRO) data from cancer survivors. METHODS: Searches were conducted using Medline, PubMed, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, Joanna Briggs Institute EBP Database and Google Scholar (Advanced). Sources of grey literature and websites of relevant organisations were also searched for relevant published and unpublished material. Articles were included if they described the development (including piloting) of monitoring systems with ongoing recruitment that collect PRO at more than one time point, from 6 months post-diagnosis onward. RESULTS: The initial searches returned 7290 unique citations. After screening titles and abstracts, 39 full-text articles were retrieved for more detailed examination. Eleven articles were included in the review, representing seven international monitoring systems. Systems varied in their scope, implementation process, governance and administration, recruitment and data collection, consent rates, PRO collection, use of PRO and translation strategies. CONCLUSIONS: The most suitable approach for setting-up and implementing a monitoring system for ongoing surveillance will differ depending on the unique requirements, aims and level of resourcing available within a particular context. Better specification and consideration of how PRO data will be used, for what purpose, and by whom, is required to inform effective translational strategies to improve outcomes for cancer survivors. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: The findings from this review may inform the future development of survivorship monitoring systems in varied environments, which in turn may improve practices that lead to better outcomes for survivors.

Cereal grains and legumes in the prevention of coronary heart disease and stroke: a review of the literature.

UNLABELLED: A number of reviewers have examined studies investigating the relationship between coronary heart disease and stroke prior to 2000. Since then, several key studies have been published. Five studies have examined the relationship between wholegrain consumption, coronary heart disease (CHD) and cardiovascular (CVD) disease and found protection for either or both diseases. The researchers concluded that a relationship between wholegrain intake and CHD is seen with at least a 20% and perhaps a 40% reduction in risk for those who eat wholegrain food habitually vs those who eat them rarely. Notwithstanding the fact that fibre is an important component of wholegrains, many studies have not shown an independent effect of fibre alone on CHD events. Thus in terms of CHD prevention, fibre is best obtained from wholegrain sources. Wholegrain products have strong antioxidant activity and contain phytoestrogens, but there is insufficient evidence to determine whether this is beneficial in CHD prevention. Soluble fibre clearly lowers cholesterol to a small but significant degree and one would expect that this would reduce CHD events. There have been a small number of epidemiological studies showing soy consumption is associated with lower rates of heart disease. Countering the positive evidence for wholegrain and legume intake has been the Nurses Health Study in 2000 that showed women who were overweight or obese consuming a high glycaemic load (GL) diet doubled their relative risk of CHD compared with those consuming a low GL diet. Although the literature relating GL with CHD events is somewhat mixed, the relationship with risk factors such as HDL cholesterol, triglyceride and C reactive protein is relatively clear. Thus, carbohydrate-rich foods should be wholegrain and, if they are not, then the lowest glycaemic index (GI) product should be used. Promotion of carbohydrate foods should be focused on wholegrain cereals because these have proven to be associated with health benefits. There is insufficient evidence about whether the addition of other components of wholegrains such as polyphenolics or minerals (such as magnesium or zinc) would improve the health benefits of refined grain foods and this needs investigation. Whether adding bran to refined carbohydrate foods can improve the situation is also not clear, and it was found that added bran lowered heart disease risk in men by 30%. This persisted after full adjustment (including GL) suggesting, at least in men, that fibre may be more important than GI. Thus there are two messages: The intake of wholegrain foods clearly protects against heart disease and stroke but the exact mechanism is not clear. Fibre, magnesium, folate and vitamins B6 and vitamin E may be important. The intake of high GI carbohydrates (from both grain and non-grain sources) in large amounts is associated with an increased risk of heart disease in overweight and obese women even when fibre intake is high but this requires further confirmation in normal-weight women. RECOMMENDATION: Carbohydrate-rich foods should be wholegrain and if they are not, then the lowest GI product available should be consumed. Glycemic index is largely irrelevant for foods that contain small amounts of carbohydrate per serve (such as most vegetables).

Insulin-sensitising drugs (metformin, troglitazone, rosiglitazone, pioglitazone, D-chiro-inositol) for polycystic ovary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is characterised by anovulation, hyperandrogenaemia and insulin resistance. Hyperinsulinaemia is known to be associated with an increase in cardiovascular risk and the development of diabetes mellitus. If insulin sensitising agents such as metformin are effective in treating features of PCOS, then they could have wider health benefits than just treating the symptoms of the syndrome. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of insulin sensitising drugs in improving clinical and biochemical features of PCOS. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders & Subfertility Group trials register (December 2002), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2002), MEDLINE (January 1966 to December 2002), and EMBASE (January 1985 to December 2002). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials which investigated the effect of insulin sensitising drugs compared with either placebo or no treatment, or compared with an ovulation induction agent. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Performed by two reviewers, one blinded to information that could have identified the authors, publisher or results of each study. Fifteen trials were included for analysis, 13 of them using metformin and involving 543 participants. MAIN RESULTS: Meta-analysis showed that metformin is effective in achieving ovulation in women with PCOS with odds ratios of 3.88 (CI 2.25 to 6.69) for metformin versus placebo and 4.41 (CI 2.37 to 8.22) for metformin and clomifene versus clomifene alone. An analysis of pregnancy rates suggests a significant treatment effect for metformin and clomifene (OR 4.40, CI 1.96 to 9.85). Metformin has a significant effect in reducing fasting insulin levels (WMD -5.37, CI -8.11 to -2.63), blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL). There was no evidence of effect on body mass index or waist:hip ratio. Metformin was associated with a significantly higher incidence of nausea, vomiting and other gastrointestinal disturbance, but no serious adverse effects were reported. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Metformin is an effective treatment for anovulation in women with PCOS. Its choice as a first line agent seems justified, and there is some evidence of benefit on parameters of the metabolic syndrome. Ovulation rates are higher when combined with clomifene (76% versus 46% when used alone), but there is no evidence to indicate whether there is an increased multiple pregnancy rate with this combination. There is no data regarding its safety in long-term use in young women. It should be used as an adjuvant to general lifestyle improvements, and not as a replacement for increased exercise and improved diet.

Oestrogen and progestogen hormone replacement therapy for peri-menopausal and post-menopausal women: weight and body fat distribution.

BACKGROUND: Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is commonly prescribed to treat menopausal symptoms and to prevent post-menopausal bone loss. However, many women are concerned about hormonal replacement therapy because they believe that such treatment will result in weight gain. The effect of HRT on weight and body fat distribution has not yet been examined in systematic reviews. It is an important topic since many women decline oestrogen therapy due to their concerns about resultant weight gain, and thus forego its potential therapeutic benefits. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of unopposed oestrogen or combined oestrogen and progestogen hormone replacement therapy (HRT) upon the weight and body fat distribution of perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. SEARCH STRATEGY: The search strategy of the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group was used for the identification of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Computerised searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Contents, Biological Abstracts and CINAHL were performed. Attempts were made to identify trials from citation lists of review articles and relevant papers already obtained. In most cases, first authors of each eligible trial were contacted for additional information. All those trials that had been located as at August 1998 were examined for eligibility. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised, placebo or no treatment controlled trials that detailed the effect of HRT on weight or body fat distribution, including studies where HRT was combined with other therapy such as diet, supplements or exercise. Studies were eligible for consideration even though the main focus of the trial may have been on another aspect of HRT. Previous HRT use should have ceased at least one month (in the case of patches, cream or gel) or three months (for oral preparations or subcutaneous pellets) before commencement of the study. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Twenty two RCTs were identified that fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this review. The results of one trial were not available in a form that allowed it to be included in the meta-analysis; however, it has been included in the text of the review for discussion. Twenty four RCTs are awaiting assessment pending additional information from first authors. Two reviewers extracted the data independently, and the weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes were estimated from the data. Results for unopposed oestrogen and combined oestrogen were analysed separately, and the effect of each treatment regimen on body weight, BMI, waist-hip ratio, fat mass and skinfold measurement was examined where available. The effect of differing dosage levels on these parameters was also examined. MAIN RESULTS: Outcomes were evaluated separately for unopposed oestrogen and oestrogen/progestogen regimens. Statistical analysis was performed using the weighted mean difference for continuous outcomes as recommended by the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group. No statistically significant difference was found in mean weight gain between those using unopposed oestrogen and non-HRT users (0.66 kg, 95% CI -0.62, 1.93). No significant difference was found in mean weight gain between those using oestrogen/progestogen therapy and non-HRT users (-0.47 kg, 95% CI -1.63, 0.69). Insufficient data exist to enable meta-analysis of the effect of unopposed oestrogen on BMI. The reviewers found no statistically significant difference in mean BMI increase between those using oestrogen/progestogen and non-HRT users (-0.50, 95% CI -1.06, 0.06). Insufficient data exist to enable meta-analysis of the effect of HRT on waist-hip ratio, fat mass or skinfold thickness. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence of no effect of unopposed oestrogen or combined oestrogen on body weight, indicating that these regimens do not cause extra weight gain in addition to that normally gained at menopause. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)