Circadian rhythm disrupting behaviours and cancer outcomes in breast cancer survivors: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Circadian rhythm disruptors (e.g., night-shift work) are risk factors for breast cancer, however studies on their association with prognosis is limited. A small but growing body of research suggests that altered sleep patterns and eating behaviours are potential mechanistic links between circadian rhythm disruptors and breast cancer. We therefore systematically summarised literature examining the influence of circadian rhythm disrupting behaviours on cancer outcomes in women with breast cancer. METHODS: A systematic search of five databases from inception to January 2021 was conducted. Original research published in English, assessing the relationship between post-diagnosis sleep patters and eating behaviours, and breast cancer outcomes were considered. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Assessment Scale for Cohort Studies. RESULTS: Eight studies published original evidence addressing sleep duration and/or quality (k = 7) and, eating time and frequency (k = 1). Longer sleep duration (≥ 9 h versus [referent range] 6-8 h) was consistently associated with increased risk of all outcomes of interest (HR range: 1.37-2.33). There was limited evidence to suggest that measures of better sleep quality are associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR range: 0.29-0.97). Shorter nightly fasting duration (< 13 h versus ≥ 13 h) was associated with higher risk of all breast cancer outcomes (HR range: 1.21-1.36). CONCLUSION: Our review suggests that circadian rhythm disrupting behaviours may influence cancer outcomes in women with breast cancer. While causality remains unclear, to further understand these associations future research directions have been identified. Additional well-designed studies, examining other exposures (e.g., light exposure, temporal eating patterns), biomarkers, and patient-reported outcomes, in diverse populations (e.g., breast cancer subtype-specific, socio-demographic diversity) are warranted.

Effect of communal dining and dining room enhancement interventions on nutritional, clinical and functional outcomes of patients in acute and sub-acute hospital, rehabilitation and aged-care settings: A systematic review.

AIMS: This review aimed to synthesise evidence on the impact of communal dining and/or dining room enhancement interventions on nutritional, clinical and functional outcomes of patients in hospital (acute or subacute), rehabilitation and residential aged-care facility settings. METHODS: Five electronic databases were searched in March 2020. Included studies considered the impact of communal dining and/or dining room enhancements on outcomes related to malnutrition in hospital (acute or subacute), rehabilitation and residential aged care facility settings. Risk of bias was assessed using the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics quality checklist. Overall quality was assessed using GRADEpro software. Outcome data were combined narratively for communal dining and dining room enhancements respectively. RESULTS: Eighteen articles from 17 unique studies were identified. Of these studies, one was a randomised control trial (moderate quality) and 16 were observational studies (all low quality). Communal dining interventions (four studies, n = 490) were associated with greater energy and protein intake and higher measures of quality of life than non-communal mealtime settings. Dining room enhancement interventions (14 studies, n = 912), overall, contributed to increased intake of food, energy, protein and fluid. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that communal dining and/or dining room enhancement has a positive impact on several outcomes of interest, however, most available evidence is of low quality. Therefore, there is a need for further large-scale, well-designed experimental studies to assess the potential impacts of these interventions.

Exploration of current dietetic practices for patients with gynaecological cancers undergoing radiotherapy in Australia: a cross-sectional survey.

PURPOSE: Radiotherapy for gynaecological cancers often causes gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities such as diarrhoea. Evidence for the potential benefits of dietary interventions on the management of acute GI toxicities is inconclusive and of low quality, with no clear evidence-based guidelines to inform clinical practice. This study aims to provide an overview of current opinions and clinical practice of dietitians treating this cohort and to examine existing models of nutrition care in Australian cancer centres. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted over a video conferencing service to collect information relating to: demographic characteristics; referral protocol and post-treatment pathways; management strategies and interventions prescribed; and attitudes and confidence in service provided. Descriptive analysis was performed on quantitative data, and thematic analysis was performed on qualitative data. RESULTS: In total, 17 dietitians across Australia participated in the study. Almost all centres (94%) had dietetics services available for this patient cohort; however, most did not have an automatic referral pathway (94%) or post-treatment pathway (88%). The opinions and prescription of dietary interventions for symptom management had multiple variations of a 'low' or 'modified-fibre' diet with differing ratios of soluble and insoluble fibre. Over half of the respondents believed that practice was not standardized within their workplace (58%) or Australia (82%). CONCLUSION: There are variations in service provision with respect to opinions and prescription of dietary modifications within dietetic practice across Australia. The present study highlights the need to investigate the efficacy of dietary interventions on symptom management to better inform evidence-based models of care.