Abstract
Purpose of Review
Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women, yet conclusive evidence of the effects of dietary modification in breast cancer survivors is lacking. Here, we summarize the literature and highlight important data regarding the association between dietary interventions and breast cancer outcomes.
Recent Findings
Long-term follow-up and secondary analysis of the Women’s Health Initiative study demonstrated a significant improvement in overall survival for women who were randomized to the low-fat diet pattern compared with those in the usual-diet group. Dietary quality as measured by Healthy Eating Index score was also associated with both a decrease in cancer-specific mortality and overall mortality.
Summary
Despite current evidence on the role of diet and nutrition in breast cancer outcomes, conclusive data to translate current findings to clinical practice is lacking and requires multidisciplinary prospective research to advance the field.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer among women worldwide and is a major global health priority. In the USA, an estimated 268,670 new cases (women and men) of BC were diagnosed in 2018 [1]. As of January 1, 2016, more than 3.5 million women with a history of BC were alive in the USA and this number is expected to rise to approximately 4.5 million in 2026, accounting for approximately 45% of all women cancer survivors [2]. There is a significant interest in lifestyle modification, including dietary interventions, weight loss, and physical activity in improving BC outcomes. There is ample data supporting the benefits of physical activity in mitigating and recovering from treatment-related side effects and consistent observational data in its ability to improve cancer outcomes [3]. However, the role of dietary modification in BC outcomes is less clear and requires further study.
Studies of dietary modification in BC have shown conflicting results, with some but not all showing an association between dietary modification and improved prognosis. The prospective, randomized controlled trial is the gold standard study design to provide direct evidence whether an intervention, such as dietary modification, can affect oncologic outcomes. However, this is methodologically difficult for several reasons. First, adopting and adhering to a lifestyle change such as dietary modification is challenging, as is monitoring adherence in the context of a clinical trial. Second, early prognostic biomarkers which might be used as short-term endpoints are lacking, making larger most costly studies with longer follow-up and traditional outcomes such as disease-free survival necessary. Finally, it is difficult to isolate the effect of diet from factors such as weight loss and physical activity, which often accompany dietary modification.
In this review, we will summarize data from observational studies and prospective randomized controlled trials that provide direct and indirect evidence of dietary modification in BC outcomes. We will review the current dietary guidelines for cancer survivors. We will also discuss the ongoing clinical trials and translational research in the field, and highlight potential areas for future research.
Diet and Breast Cancer Incidence
Descendants of those who migrate from countries with a low incidence of BC to countries with a high incidence will have a higher rate of BC [4,5] emphasizing the impact of environmental factors on BC development. There are significant geographical differences in dietary patterns and components which suggest that diet may be a factor in BC risk and has led to the investigation of dietary interventions and BC incidence and outcomes. The evidence for diet and BC risk is complicated, but it has provided some rationales and foundation to understand and study dietary modification after a diagnosis of BC.
One difference between Western and Eastern diets is the high fat component in the Western diet. Several mechanisms of how a high-fat diet may affect BC incidence have been proposed [6]. High fat intake leads to the accumulation of adipose tissue, where the conversion of androstenedione to estrone occurs, increasing the concentrations of estrogens which subsequently activate BC growth. Polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) is metabolized to arachidonic acid, which activates P450 aromatase, further promoting the conversion of androstenedione to estrone [7]. Furthermore, PUFA can reduce the binding of estrogens to serum binding proteins, increasing the proportion of circulating free estrogens that are biologically more potent [6].
Additionally, more than a decade ago, researchers noted the similarity between the risk factors for cancers with higher incidence in Western countries and risk factors for insulin resistance. This has led to the insulin-cancer hypothesis [8], which has been supported by both animal and human data [9]. Chronic hyperinsulinemia downregulates insulin-like growth factor binding proteins (IGFBP), leading to an increase of free IGF-1. Free IGF-1 is the bioavailable form and may promote mutagenic change in tissues including breast tissue [9]. Insulin can also activate intracellular signaling pathways implicated in BC, including the PI3K/mTOR pathways, promoting cancer cell growth [10].
One meta-regression analysis, including a total of 21 eligible studies, 3609 cases and 7137 controls, demonstrated that high concentrations of IGF-1 and its binding protein, IGFBP-3, is associated with increased risk of BC in premenopausal women [11]. In an analysis of 21,103 women in the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) with 14.7 years of follow-up and 1185 BC cases, [12] fasting baseline insulin level was positively associated with BC risk (multivariable-adjusted HR for highest vs. lowest quartile 1.41, 95% CI 1.16–1.72, p < 0.0003) [12]. This study provided support for an association between hyperinsulinemia and BC risk.
In animal models, high-fat diets were shown to increase the occurrence of mammary tumors in rodents [13]. However, individual human case-control and cohort studies have shown mixed results. A meta-analysis of 45 published studies (including 31 case-control and 14 cohort studies with a total of 25,015 cases of BC and over 580,000 control subjects) examined the role of dietary fat in relation to BC risk and found that higher fat intake is associated with an increased risk of BC [14]. Subjects consuming the highest vs. lowest levels of total fat had a 13% increase in BC risk (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.03–1.25) [15]. This increase in BC risk was most pronounced for saturated fat (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.06–1.35) [15]. The WHI Dietary Modification (WHI-DM) trial is a randomized controlled study evaluating a low-fat diet intervention for prevention of breast and colorectal cancer. It demonstrated a numerical but non-significant reduction in BC incidence after a mean of 8.3 years intervention (during intervention HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84–1.01; post-intervention HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.89–1.05) [16].
Epidemiological studies have linked the Mediterranean diet to a reduced risk of BC. Adherence to the Mediterranean diet can be measured by a Mediterranean Diet Score (MDS), ranging from 0 (lowest adherence) to 9 (highest adherence). As demonstrated in a case-control study performed in Italy and Switzerland, the odds ratio for BC was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.71–0.95) in women with a MDS of 6–9 compared with those with a MDS of 0–3 [17]. In the PREDIMED (Prevención con Dieta Mediterránea) study conducted in Spain, participants were randomized to a Mediterranean diet supplemented with extra-virgin olive oil, a Mediterranean diet supplemented with mixed nuts, or a control diet (advised to reduce dietary fat). Breast cancer incidence was lower in the two Mediterranean diet groups combined than in the control group (HR, 0.43, 95% CI, 0.21–0.88) [18], suggesting a beneficial effect of a Mediterranean diet in the primary prevention of BC.
Our knowledge on diet and BC risk has provided the rationale and foundation to investigate and apply dietary modification in women with a diagnosis of BC. The data has suggested potential mechanisms by which diet may impact BC survival, including various signaling pathways essential in the pathogenesis of primary BC which may be important in the development of BC recurrence or a second primary cancer.
Associations Between Dietary Patterns and Quality and Breast Cancer Outcomes
Dietary Pattern
The two largest prospective randomized studies in the USA to investigate the association between dietary pattern and BC outcomes are the WHEL (Women’s Healthy Eating and Living) and WINS (Women’s Intervention Nutrition Study) studies (Table 1).
The WINS trial enrolled 2437 postmenopausal women between 48 and 79 years of age who were treated for early stage BC. They were randomized into a dietary intervention (targeting fat intake reduction) or a usual-diet control group. Women in the intervention group were given a fat gram goal by centrally trained, registered dieticians and received eight biweekly individual counseling sessions and subsequent contacts every 3 months, while the control group received general dietary guidelines and dietician contacts every 3 months. After a median follow-up of 60 months, fat intake was significantly reduced in the intervention group (29.2–20.3% of calories, p < 0.0001), but not in the control group [19•]. Importantly, participants in the intervention group achieved a 2.7 kg lower mean body weight than the control group (p = 0.005) [19•]. Relapse-free survival, the primary endpoint, was significantly lower in the intervention group compared with the control group (9.8% vs. 12.4% with events, HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.60–0.98, p = 0.03) [19•]. Exploratory subgroup analysis by receptor status revealed a particularly favorable impact in women with hormone receptor-negative BC (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.25–0.77), but not in women with hormone receptor-positive cancer. Although there were fewer deaths observed in the intervention group, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (9.1% vs. 11.1% cumulative mortality, RR 0.83, p = 0.146) [20].
The WHEL study used a slightly more comprehensive approach by targeting a diet high in vegetables, fruits, and fiber in addition to being low in fat. Three thousand eighty-eight women (2448 were postmenopausal at participation) were randomly assigned to the intervention or comparison group. Participants in the intervention group received telephone counseling from trained counselors, 12 cooking classes in the first year, and monthly newsletters throughout the study. Women in the comparison group were provided general guidelines on dietary intake, 4 optional cooking class in the first year (average attendance: 1 out of 4), and 24 newsletters during the first 4 years. After a mean of 7.3-year follow-up, there was no significant difference in invasive BC events (intervention vs. control 16.7% vs. 16.9%, HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80–1.14, p = 0.63) or all-cause mortality (intervention vs. control 10.1% vs. 10.3%, HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.72–1.15, p = 0.43) [21•]. It is noteworthy, however, that women in the intervention arm of this study did not lose weight compared with the control arm, which is in contrast to the WINS study. A subsequent analysis focusing on women without baseline hot flashes (more likely to have higher circulating estradiol concentrations) was conducted and demonstrated a decrease in BC recurrence, predominantly distant recurrence (intervention vs. control 83.9% vs. 76.4% BC free, p = 0.002), regardless of hormone receptor status (p = 0.63) [22].
Although the conflicting results of these studies have made it difficult to translate dietary modification into practice, there are some fundamental differences between these two studies which may in part explain the contradictory results. [23] The WINS focused on a low-fat diet whereas the WHEL study adopted a plant-based diet including high vegetable, fruits, and fiber in addition to the low-fat component. Decrease in dietary fat intake was less pronounced in the WHEL study than in WINS. There were also differences in study populations. WINS included only postmenopausal women 48–79 years old, while the WHEL study included both pre- and postmenopausal women 18–70 years old. WINS participants had more favorable prognosis compared with those in WHEL with more than 50% of patients having stage I disease while only one-third of patients in the WHEL had stage I disease. Furthermore, the WINS enrolled all participants within 1 year of diagnosis and the WHEL study enrolled patients up to 4 years post diagnosis. Finally, women in WINS study intervention arm lost weight (2.7 kg between-group difference at year 5), while there was no between-group difference in the WHEL study, suggesting weight loss may be necessary to improve prognosis.
Importantly, both studies relied on self-reported dietary assessment. The survey completion rate in the WINS declined with time (~ 70% at year 3 and ~ 40% at year 5), while the completion rate in the WHEL study only experienced a small decline, about 85% at year 6. The authors of both studies reported a completers-only analysis in terms of dietary data, BC free survival, and mortality. This assumed that diets of the non-responders were similar to the diets of the responders, which may lead to selection bias; however, in WINS, there was an improvement in relapse-free survival in this analysis (9.8% vs. 12.4% with events, HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.60–0.98, p = 0.03) [19•].
Most recently, a secondary post-hoc analysis of WHI-DM was published, which focused on overall survival and mortality in postmenopausal women who developed BC during the low-fat dietary intervention. After an average of 11.5 years’ follow-up, overall survival was improved in women in the intervention group than in the usual-diet comparison group (10-year survival of 82% and 78%, respectively; HR 0.78, 95%CI 0.65–0.94; p = 0.01) [24••] (Table 1). Although there were fewer deaths from BC, other cancers, cardiovascular disease, and other causes in the dietary intervention group than the control group, only deaths from cardiovascular disease were statistically different between the two groups (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39–0.99). This study highlighted that a low-fat diet may reduce cardiovascular deaths in women diagnosed with BC, which is a major source of mortality for this population [25, 26].
Additional dietary patterns have been investigated. For example, the prudent diet (as characterized by a diet high in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes, poultry, and fish) and the Western pattern (as characterized by high intake of refined grains, processed and red meats, desserts, high-fat dairy products, and French fries) were analyzed in the NHS (Nurses’ Health Study) and LACE (Life After Cancer Epidemiology) trials [27, 28] (Table 1). The NHS demonstrated an inverse relation between the prudent diet and non-BC mortality (relative risks of non-BC death were 0.85 [95% CI, 0.53 to 1.35], 0.74 [95% CI, 0.45 to 1.21], 0.70 [95% CI, 0.42 to 1.17], and 0.54 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.95]; p = 0.03, from lowest to highest quintile of intake of prudent diet). Likewise, LACE confirmed an inverse association between the prudent diet and non-BC mortality. In addition, adhering to a prudent dietary pattern was shown to correlate with all-cause mortality (p trend 0.02; HR for highest quartile 0.57; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.90).
Diet Quality and Inflammation
Recent studies and guidelines have emphasized the quality of “total diet,” most often assessed by the Healthy Eating Index (HEI). The HEI score is calculated based on a variety of food components according to recommendations of the Dietary Guidelines for Americas, with higher HEI scores correlating with better-quality diet. The Health, Eating, Activity, and Lifestyle (HEAL) Study demonstrated that women who consumed better-quality diets (as defined by the highest-quartile HEI-2005 score) had a 60% reduction in all-cause mortality compared with those who consumed mixed-quality diet (middle quartiles HEI-2005 score) or poor-quality diet (lowest quartile HEI-2005 score) (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.17–0.94), and an 88% reduction in BC related mortality (HR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02–0.99) [29]. The NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) III study showed similar results with a 41% reduction in overall mortality (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.45–0.77) and a 65% reduction in all cancer-related mortality (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.19–0.63) in women with high-quality diets (highest-quartile HEI score) [30••] (Table 1). Another diet score was developed based on the ACS (American Cancer Society) recommendations, which was used in the Cancer Prevention Study-II (CPS-II) Nutrition Cohort [31]. The score was derived from summing three key food-based recommendations (fruits/vegetables, whole grains, and limited consumption of red and processed meats). The score ranges from 0 to 9, with a score of 9 reflecting the optimal adherence to the ACS guidelines. There was no association between post-diagnosis diet score with either BC-specific mortality (scores 6–9 vs. 0–2 RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.90–2.30) or cardiovascular disease mortality (scores 6–9 vs. 0–2 RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.47–1.39), but a higher score was associated with a borderline lower risk of other causes of death (scores 6–9 vs. 0–2 RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.56–1.07; continuous diet score RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79–0.99, p trend = 0.03) [31] (Table 1). These studies demonstrate the need for further research on the “total diet” approach.
Interestingly, dietary quality is inversely associated with inflammatory potential of diet and high-quality diets have lower dietary inflammatory index (DII) scores [32]. The association between baseline dietary inflammatory potential and BC mortality was evaluated in the WHI. A total of 122,788 postmenopausal women with a mean of 16-year follow-up completed a baseline food frequency questionnaire, among which, 7495 developed BC and 667 died of BC33. DII was calculated based on a comprehensive literature review on the association between dietary factors and six inflammatory markers (IL-1β, IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, TNFα, and C-reactive protein [CRP]). Higher DII scores signify a more inflammatory diet and lower scores indicate a less inflammatory diet. Although there was no significant association between baseline DII scores with BC incidence, a higher risk of death from BC was noted in those with the highest vs. lowest DII scores (HR 1.33 95% CI 1.01–1.76 p = 0.03) [33]. A second analysis of the WHI evaluated the association between post-cancer diagnosis DII and mortality. A total of 2150 postmenopausal women were included in the study. Energy-adjusted DII (E-DII) scores were inversely associated with cardiovascular mortality (HR Q1VSQ4 0.44; 95% CI 0.24–0.82; p trend 0.005), but no association was found between E-CII scores and BC-specific mortality (HR Q1VSQ4 0.96; 95% CI 0.62–1.49; p trend 0.96) or all-cause mortality (HR Q1VSQ4 0.82; 95% CI 0.63–1.05; p trend 0.17) [34].
Post-diagnosis CRP, one of the six inflammation markers used in DII, was examined separately in an analysis of the WHEL study [35]. CRP was measured by high-sensitivity electrochemiluminescence assay and had a positive association with death due to any cause, death due to BC, and additional BC events. CRP, an acute phase protein in response to inflammation, thus may have potential as a prognostic biomarker for BC survival, modifiable by improving diet quality and adopting other healthy lifestyle modifications.
Prolonged Nightly Fasting
Another novel dietary intervention approach is to prolong the nightly fasting interval. Although patients enrolled in the WHEL study were randomized, the two cohorts were combined for the analysis of the effects of prolonged nightly fasting. A total of 2413 women reported a mean fasting duration of 12.5 h per night. Nightly fasting interval less than 13 h per night was associated with a 36% increase in BC recurrence compared with those reported nightly fasting interval more than 13 h. During a mean of 11.4 years of follow-up, there was no significant difference in BC mortality or all-cause mortality based on fasting interval [36].
Dietary Modification and Weight Loss
Two-thirds of BC survivors are overweight or obese at the time of diagnosis [37]. There is increasing evidence indicating that being overweight/obese increases the risk of BC recurrence and decreases survival [38,39,40,41,42]. Although it is currently unknown whether intentional weight loss will improve prognosis, there are some data supporting this hypothesis and a clinical trial to answer this question is ongoing [43]. Frequently, dietary intervention will result in weight loss, making it difficult to separate the effects of dietary change from those from weight loss. In the WHI-DM trial, body weight was 2.2 kg lower in the dietary group compared with the usual-diet control group (p < 0.001) [24••]. Similarly, participants in the WINS lost an average of 2.7 kg more weight in the intervention vs. control group [19•]. The LEAN (Lifestyle, Exercise and Nutrition) study randomized BC survivors to either a usual care or lifestyle intervention (by either in-person or telephone-based counseling on healthy diet, physical activity, targeting weight loss) [44]. The intervention led to a successful decrease in total fat/saturated fat intake and an increase in fiber and fruit intake. Participants in the intervention group who lost ≥ 5% body weight demonstrated a significant improvement in their HEI score compared with those who did not lose ≥ 5% body weight [44]. This, like the conflicting results of the WINS and WHEL studies, raises the question of whether the impact of dietary modification may be partially or entirely mediated by weight loss and whether outcomes can be affected by dietary modification without significant weight loss.
Ultimately, there is no conclusive evidence to support any one specific dietary pattern in BC survivors. The WINS study demonstrated an improved relapse-free survival in women on low-fat diet intervention, but this has not been confirmed by other large studies. Novel dietary interventions further evaluating fasting intervals, dietary inflammation, and overall quality are needed.
Clinical Trials and Future Research
Further investigation of the effects of dietary patterns and components on BC prognosis is needed to refine dietary recommendations for cancer survivors. There are dozens of active trials (clinicaltrials.gov) on dietary intervention either alone or combined with other behavioral therapies. These studies evaluate different dietary patterns (such as Mediterranean diet), compositions (such as low-carbohydrate diet), energy restrictions (such as low-calorie diet), supplements (such as fish oil), and include biomarker identification and analysis. Among these, the SUCCESS C trial uses a telephone-based lifestyle intervention to have patients adopt a hypocaloric diet with less fat, more whole grain products, and fruit and vegetables with a goal to lose weight, as well as a gradual increase in physical activity. Interim analysis reported at the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium demonstrated promising results for those who lost weight. At the end of the 2-year follow-up period, patients in the intervention group lost an average of 1.0 kg and those in the control arm gained an average of 0.95 kg. Interestingly, those who completed the lifestyle intervention program had improved disease-free survival compared with those who completed a general program in the control arm (events 5.1% vs. 8.8%, HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.33–0.78, p = 0.002) [45].
One challenge we face is the lack of biomarkers to evaluate patients’ adherence to dietary interventions and to predict long-term outcomes. Nutritional biomarkers may provide complementary information beyond self-reported food intake data. In the field of metabolic syndrome, dietary biomarkers (DB) including pentadecanoic acid /α-linolenic acid (markers for total fatty acid), EPA/DHA (markers for fatty fish), β-carotene, and alkylresorcinol (markers for vegetables and whole grains) were combined to create a DB score to assess dietary compliance [46]. This same study found that median DB score was 57% higher in the healthy Nordic diet group than the control diet group, suggesting this and/or other dietary biomarkers may be a useful tool to assess compliance in diet intervention studies.
Of equal importance is the need for prognostic biomarkers. Prognostic biomarkers would allow for shorter and more diverse studies (thus allowing for evaluation of a larger number of dietary interventions) to be conducted with biomarker endpoints. Such studies could then inform the design of larger clinical trials with traditional BC outcomes such as risk of recurrence and death. Post-diagnosis high-sensitivity CRP, as mentioned above, may serve as one such potential biomarker, but this requires validation. Obesity-related markers have also been investigated. In a nested case-control study using Cancer Prevention Study-II (CPS-II) Nutrition Cohort, low level of adiponectin and high levels of IGF-1, CRP, and C-peptide have been linked with postmenopausal BC risk, but only the association between C-peptide and BC risk was statistically significant (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.08–2.45, p linear trend 0.001) [47]. In the HEAL study, fasting C-peptide in patients without type II diabetes was associated with increased all-cause mortality and BC-specific mortality. In patients with type II diabetes, the association between C-peptide levels and BC-specific mortality was stronger [48]. Another prospective cohort study including 512 women with early stage BC observed positive associations between fasting insulin levels and BC outcomes (distant recurrence HR for highest vs. lowest quartile 2.0, 95% CI, 1.2–3.3; all-cause mortality HR for highest vs. lowest quartile 3.1, 95% CI 1.7–5.7) [49]. Additional research is necessary to validate these inflammatory and obesity-related markers and to identify novel prognostic lifestyle linked biomarkers.
Current Guidelines
The American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) publishes comprehensive guidelines for the prevention of cancer, yet guidelines for cancer survivors remain relatively vague. The AICR acknowledges the WINS and WHEL studies, but finds it difficult to translate these results into recommendations for BC survivors given the discrepancies in results and potential confounding factor of weight loss. With respect to micronutrient supplements, the AICR guidelines do not support their use as a means of improving outcome in cancer survivors, based on data from 39 randomized controlled trials [50].
The ACS also publishes guidelines on nutrition and physical activity in cancer survivors, with an emphasis on achieving and maintaining a healthy diet and weight [51]. The ACS guidelines stress the importance of eating a diet high in vegetables, fruits, and whole grains. Similar to the AICR guidelines, ACS states that dietary supplements are unlikely to improve prognosis or overall survival in cancer survivors and importantly, some supplements may cause harm. With regard to diet composition, the ACS adopts both the Institute of Medicine and current Federal Guidelines, and the American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines that the spectrum of dietary composition for an adult cancer survivor should include fat 20 to 35% of energy (AHA 25–35%), carbohydrate 45 to 65% of energy (AHA 50–60%), and protein 10 to 35% of energy (at least 0.8 g/kg). Choices of food sources are also important. For example, healthy carbohydrate sources are foods like vegetables, fruits, whole grains, and legumes. A list of resources on nutrition and weight management is summarized in Table 2.
The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Survivorship guidelines (version 2.2018) address nutrition and weight management as well. The guidelines emphasize dietary patterns as well as eating habits including portion size, night grazing, snacking habits, and use of added fats and/or sugars to foods and beverages. Supplement use is again not recommended by NCCN, except in women with documented deficiencies, inadequate diet, or comorbid conditions, such as osteoporosis.
Conclusions
It is currently unknown whether weight loss is required to improve prognosis, as suggested by the conflicting results of WINS and WHEL, and the WHI-DM and LEAN studies, or whether specific diets alone may have an impact. Healthy diet and weight management should be encouraged for all BC survivors as it may decrease mortality from other causes, especially cardiovascular disease, a significant concern for BC survivors. In addition to dietary patterns and weight loss, dietary quality has been an emerging research topic. The HEAL and NHANES III studies substantiated the need for further research on “total diet” approach, perhaps a more feasible approach than specific diet patterns, in BC survivors. Identification of novel lifestyle linked prognostic biomarkers would allow us to design more versatile yet efficient studies to better define the role of dietary intervention in BC survivors and ultimately provide more personalized dietary recommendations for cancer survivors.
References
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
Cancer Facts and Figures 2018, <https://www.cancer.org/research/cancer-facts-statistics/all-cancer-facts-figures/cancer-facts-figures-2018.html> (2018).
Scheithauer BW, Kovacs K, Nose V, Lombardero M, Osamura YR, Lloyd RV, et al. Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1-associated thyrotropin-producing pituitary carcinoma: report of a probable de novo example. Hum Pathol. 2009;40:270–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2008.06.013.
Peterson LL, Ligibel JA. Physical activity and breast cancer: an opportunity to improve outcomes. Curr Oncol Rep. 2018;20:50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-018-0702-1.
Buell P. Changing incidence of breast cancer in Japanese-American women. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1973;51:1479–83.
Stanford JL, Herrinton LJ, Schwartz SM, Weiss NS. Breast cancer incidence in Asian migrants to the United States and their descendants. Epidemiology. 1995;6:181–3.
Kotepui M. Diet and risk of breast cancer. Contemp Oncol. 2016;20:13–9. https://doi.org/10.5114/wo.2014.40560.
Rose DP. Effects of dietary fatty acids on breast and prostate cancers: evidence from in vitro experiments and animal studies. Am J Clin Nutr. 1997;66:1513S–22S. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/66.6.1513S.
Giovannucci E. Nutrition, insulin, insulin-like growth factors and cancer. Hormone Metab Res = Hormon- und Stoffwechselforschung = Hormones et metabolisme. 2003;35:694–704. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-814147.
Renehan AG, Frystyk J, Flyvbjerg A. Obesity and cancer risk: the role of the insulin-IGF axis. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2006;17:328–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tem.2006.08.006.
Sengupta S, Peterson TR, Sabatini DM. Regulation of the mTOR complex 1 pathway by nutrients, growth factors, and stress. Mol Cell. 2010;40:310–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2010.09.026.
Renehan AG, Zwahlen M, Minder C, O’Dwyer ST, Shalet SM, Egger M. Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I, IGF binding protein-3, and cancer risk: systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Lancet. 2004;363:1346–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16044-3.
Kabat GC, et al. Serum glucose and insulin and risk of cancers of the breast, endometrium, and ovary in postmenopausal women. Eur J Cancer Prev: the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation. 2018;27:261–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000435.
Holmes MD, Willett WC. Does diet affect breast cancer risk? Breast cancer research : BCR. 2004;6:170–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr909.
Freedman LS, Kipnis V, Schatzkin A, Potischman N. Methods of epidemiology: evaluating the fat-breast cancer hypothesis--comparing dietary instruments and other developments. Cancer J. 2008;14:69–74. https://doi.org/10.1097/PPO.0b013e31816a5e02.
Boyd NF, Stone J, Vogt KN, Connelly BS, Martin LJ, Minkin S. Dietary fat and breast cancer risk revisited: a meta-analysis of the published literature. Br J Cancer. 2003;89:1672–85. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6601314.
Thomson CA, van Horn L, Caan BJ, Aragaki AK, Chlebowski RT, Manson JE, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality during the intervention and postintervention periods of the Women’s Health Initiative dietary modification trial. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev: a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2014;23:2924–35. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-0922.
Turati F, et al. Mediterranean diet and breast cancer risk. Nutrients. 2018;10:E326. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10030326.
Toledo E, Salas-Salvadó J, Donat-Vargas C, Buil-Cosiales P, Estruch R, Ros E, et al. Mediterranean diet and invasive breast cancer risk among women at high cardiovascular risk in the PREDIMED trial: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175:1752–60. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.4838.
• Chlebowski RT, et al. Dietary fat reduction and breast cancer outcome: interim efficacy results from the women’s intervention nutrition study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:1767–76. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djj494. A randomized controlled trial demonstrated that the adoption of a low-fat diet is associated with modest weight loss and improved relapse-free survival among post-menopausal women with early stage BC.
Chlebowski RT, Blackburn G, Thomson CA, Nixon DW, Shapiro A, Hoy MK, Goodman MT, Giuliano AE, Karanja N, McAndrew P, Hudis C, Butler J, Merkel D, Kristal A, Caan B, Michaelson R, Vinciguerra V, Del Prete S, Winkler M, Hall R, Simon M, Winters BL, Elashoff RM. Dietary fat reduction and breast cancer outcome: Interim efficacy results from the Women’s Intervention Nutrition Study (WINS) J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98(24):1767–76.
• Pierce JP, et al. Influence of a diet very high in vegetables, fruit, and fiber and low in fat on prognosis following treatment for breast cancer: the Women’s Healthy Eating and Living (WHEL) randomized trial. Jama. 2007;298:289–98. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.3.289. A randomized controlled trial failed to show reduction of breast cancer events or mortality among survivors of early stage BC.
Gold EB, Pierce JP, Natarajan L, Stefanick ML, Laughlin GA, Caan BJ, et al. Dietary pattern influences breast cancer prognosis in women without hot flashes: the women’s healthy eating and living trial. J Clin Oncol : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2009;27:352–9. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.16.1067.
Pierce JP. Diet and breast cancer prognosis: making sense of the Women’s Healthy Eating and Living and Women’s Intervention Nutrition Study trials. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2009;21:86–91.
•• Chlebowski RT, et al. Association of low-fat dietary pattern with breast cancer overall survival: a secondary analysis of the Women’s Health Initiative randomized clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4:e181212. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.1212 . A recent update on overall survival of the WHI randomized controlled trial which included 1,764 postmenopausal women and demonstrated that those randomized to a low-fat dietary pattern had improved overall survival.
Patnaik JL, Byers T, DiGuiseppi C, Dabelea D, Denberg TD. Cardiovascular disease competes with breast cancer as the leading cause of death for older females diagnosed with breast cancer: a retrospective cohort study. Breast Cancer Res : BCR. 2011;13:R64. https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr2901.
Park NJ, Chang Y, Bender C, Conley Y, Chlebowski RT, van Londen GJ, et al. Cardiovascular disease and mortality after breast cancer in postmenopausal women: results from the Women’s Health Initiative. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0184174. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0184174.
Kroenke CH, Fung TT, Hu FB, Holmes MD. Dietary patterns and survival after breast cancer diagnosis. J Clin Oncol : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2005;23:9295–303. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.02.0198.
Kwan ML, Weltzien E, Kushi LH, Castillo A, Slattery ML, Caan BJ. Dietary patterns and breast cancer recurrence and survival among women with early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2009;27:919–26. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.19.4035.
George SM, Irwin ML, Smith AW, Neuhouser ML, Reedy J, McTiernan A, et al. Postdiagnosis diet quality, the combination of diet quality and recreational physical activity, and prognosis after early-stage breast cancer. Cancer Causes Control : CCC. 2011;22:589–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-011-9732-9.
•• Deshmukh AA, et al. The association between dietary quality and overall and cancer-specific mortality among cancer survivors, NHANES III. JNCI Cancer Spectrum. 2018;2:pky022. https://doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pky022. An observational study showed that a high-quality diet was associated with decreased risk of overall mortality and breast cancer-specific mortality when compared with a poor-quality diet.
McCullough ML, Gapstur SM, Shah R, Campbell PT, Wang Y, Doyle C, et al. Pre- and postdiagnostic diet in relation to mortality among breast cancer survivors in the CPS-II nutrition cohort. Cancer causes & control : CCC. 2016;27:1303–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-016-0802-x.
Wirth MD, Hébert JR, Shivappa N, Hand GA, Hurley TG, Drenowatz C, et al. Anti-inflammatory dietary inflammatory index scores are associated with healthier scores on other dietary indices. Nutr Res. 2016;36:214–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nutres.2015.11.009.
Tabung FK, Steck SE, Liese AD, Zhang J, Ma Y, Caan B, et al. Association between dietary inflammatory potential and breast cancer incidence and death: results from the Women’s Health Initiative. Br J Cancer. 2016;114:1277–85. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2016.98.
Zheng J, Tabung FK, Zhang J, Liese AD, Shivappa N, Ockene JK, et al. Association between post-cancer diagnosis dietary inflammatory potential and mortality among invasive breast cancer survivors in the Women’s Health Initiative. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2018;27:454–63. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-17-0569.
Villasenor A, Flatt SW, Marinac C, Natarajan L, Pierce JP, Patterson RE. Postdiagnosis C-reactive protein and breast cancer survivorship: findings from the WHEL study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2014;23:189–99. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-13-0852.
Marinac CR, Nelson SH, Breen CI, Hartman SJ, Natarajan L, Pierce JP, et al. Prolonged nightly fasting and breast cancer prognosis. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2:1049–55. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.0164.
Cecchini RS, Swain SM, Costantino JP, Rastogi P, Jeong JH, Anderson SJ, et al. Body mass index at diagnosis and breast cancer survival prognosis in clinical trial populations from NRG Oncology/NSABP B-30, B-31, B-34, and B-38. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2016;25:51–9. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0334-T.
Protani M, Coory M, Martin JH. Effect of obesity on survival of women with breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;123:627–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-010-0990-0.
Chan DS, et al. Body mass index and survival in women with breast cancer-systematic literature review and meta-analysis of 82 follow-up studies. Ann Oncol : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology / ESMO. 2014;25:1901–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdu042.
Niraula S, Ocana A, Ennis M, Goodwin PJ. Body size and breast cancer prognosis in relation to hormone receptor and menopausal status: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;134:769–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-2073-x.
Warren LE, et al. Body mass index and locoregional recurrence in women with early-stage breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23:3870–9. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5437-3.
Sun L, Zhu Y, Qian Q, Tang L. Body mass index and prognosis of breast cancer: an analysis by menstruation status when breast cancer diagnosis. Medicine. 2018;97:e11220. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000011220.
Ligibel JA, Barry WT, Alfano C, Hershman DL, Irwin M, Neuhouser M, et al. Randomized phase III trial evaluating the role of weight loss in adjuvant treatment of overweight and obese women with early breast cancer (Alliance A011401): study design. NPJ breast cancer. 2017;3:37. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41523-017-0040-8.
Anderson C, Harrigan M, George SM, Ferrucci LM, Sanft T, Irwin ML, et al. Changes in diet quality in a randomized weight loss trial in breast cancer survivors: the lifestyle, exercise, and nutrition (LEAN) study. NPJ breast cancer. 2016;2:16026. https://doi.org/10.1038/npjbcancer.2016.26.
Presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium Dec 7 2018, Janni et al. Lifestyle Intervention and Effect on Disease-free survival in early breast cancer patients: Interim analysis from the randomized SUCCESS C study. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00847444.
Marklund M, Magnusdottir OK, Rosqvist F, Cloetens L, Landberg R, Kolehmainen M, et al. A dietary biomarker approach captures compliance and cardiometabolic effects of a healthy Nordic diet in individuals with metabolic syndrome. J Nutr. 2014;144:1642–9. https://doi.org/10.3945/jn.114.193771.
Gaudet MM, Patel AV, Teras LR, Sun J, Campbell PT, Stevens VL, et al. Obesity-related markers and breast cancer in CPS-II nutrition cohort. Int J Mol Epidemiol Gen. 2013;4:156–66.
Irwin ML, Duggan C, Wang CY, Smith AW, McTiernan A, Baumgartner RN, et al. Fasting C-peptide levels and death resulting from all causes and breast cancer: the health, eating, activity, and lifestyle study. J Clin Oncol : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2011;29:47–53. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2010.28.4752.
Goodwin PJ, Ennis M, Pritchard KI, Trudeau ME, Koo J, Madarnas Y, et al. Fasting insulin and outcome in early-stage breast cancer: results of a prospective cohort study. J Clin Oncol : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2002;20:42–51. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2002.20.1.42.
Food, nutrition, physical activity, and the prevention of cancer: a global perspective, <https://www.wcrf.org/dietandcancer/breast-cancer; (2017).
Rock CL, Doyle C, Demark-Wahnefried W, Meyerhardt J, Courneya KS, Schwartz AL, et al. Nutrition and physical activity guidelines for cancer survivors. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62:242–74. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21142.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
Lai Xu declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Lindsay L. Peterson has received compensation from the American Cancer Society for participation as a member of its external review board.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Cancer
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Xu, L., Peterson, L.L. The Impact of Diet on Breast Cancer Outcomes. Curr Nutr Rep 8, 212–221 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13668-019-00278-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13668-019-00278-0