Search

Nutrition is essential for peripheral nerve function, yet dietary factors associated with chronic chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) remain poorly characterized. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to determine differences in diet quality and macronutrients for cancer survivors with and without CIPN. Cancer survivors (e.g., ≥3 months post platinum and/or taxane-based neurotoxic chemotherapy) with (i.e., ≥1/4 PRO-CTACE™ Numbness and Tingling Severity) and without CIPN completed the VioScreen Research Graphical Food Frequency Questionnaire. The association among diet (Healthy Eating Index [HEI]), macronutrient intake (average percent caloric intake), and CIPN severity were analyzed using generalized linear regression models, adjusting for caloric intake, body mass index, age, and sex. Results revealed that for each one-point increase in diet quality, PRO-CTCAE severity decreased by −0.06 (95% CI: −0.10, −0.02, P < 0.01). Participants without CIPN reported higher diet quality than those with CIPN (HEI mean: 70.11 vs 68.45) (OR = 0.94, P = 0.03, 95% CI: 0.89, 0.99). Participants with CIPN had significantly higher carbohydrate consumption than participants without CIPN (OR = 1.11, P = 0.04, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.22). There were no significant differences in consumption of proteins or fats between groups. Further research should be pursued to discover the potential benefits of dietary interventions for CIPN management among cancers survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the joint guidelines developed by the Society for Integrative Oncology (SIO) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) regarding the use of integrative therapies to manage cancer-related symptoms. It provides evidence-based recommendations for complementary therapies, including acupuncture, mindfulness-based interventions, yoga, and t'ai chi, aimed at alleviating pain, anxiety, depression, and fatigue associated with cancer treatment.

Objective Complementary and alternative medicine, or integrative medicine, has become increasingly popular among patients with head and neck cancer. Despite its increasing prevalence, many patients feel uncomfortable discussing such therapies with their physicians, and many physicians are unaware and underequipped to evaluate or discuss their use with patients. The aim of this article is to use recent data to outline the decision making inherent to integrative medicine utilization among patients with head and neck cancer, to discuss the ethical implications inherent to balancing integrative and conventional approaches to treatment, and to highlight available resources to enhance head and neck cancer providers' understanding of integrative medicine. Data Sources Randomized controlled trials involving integrative medicine or complementary and alternative medicine treatment for cancer patients. Review Methods Trials were drawn from a systematic PubMed database search categorized into cancer prevention, treatment, and symptom management. Conclusions Integrative medicine is gaining popularity for the management of cancer and is most commonly used for symptom management. A number of randomized controlled trials provide data to support integrative therapies, yet physicians who treat head and neck cancer may be faced with ethical dilemmas and practical barriers surrounding incorporation of integrative medicine. Implications for Practice In the management of head and neck cancer, there is an increasing demand for awareness of, dialogue about, and research evaluating integrative medicine therapies. It is important for otolaryngologists to become aware of integrative therapy options, their risks and benefits, and resources for further information to effectively counsel their patients.

Objectives: Medication access and adherence play key roles in determining patient outcomes. We investigated whether cost-related non-adherence (CRNA) to prescription medications was associated with worse patient-reported outcomes in a population-based systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) cohort. Methods: Sociodemographic and prescription data were collected by structured interviews in 2014–2015 from patients meeting SLE criteria in the established Michigan Lupus Epidemiology & Surveillance (MILES) Cohort. We examined the associations between CRNA and potential confounders such as sociodemographics and health insurance coverage, and outcome measures of SLE activity and damage using multivariable linear regression. Results: 462 SLE participants completed the study visit: 430 (93.1%) female, 208 (45%) Black, and mean age 53.3 years. 100 (21.6%) participants with SLE reported CRNA in the preceding 12 months. After adjusting for covariates, CRNA was associated with both higher levels of current SLE disease activity [SLAQ: β coeff 2.7 (95% CI 1.3, 4.1), p < 0.001] and damage [LDIQ β coeff 1.4 (95% CI 0.5, 2.4), p = 0.003]. Race, health insurance status, and fulfilling Fibromyalgia (FM) Survey Criteria were independently associated with both higher (worse) SLAQ and LDIQ scores; female sex was further associated with higher SLAQ scores. Conclusion: Patients with SLE who reported CRNA in the previous 12 months had significantly worse self-reported current disease activity and damage scores compared to those not reporting CRNA. Raising awareness and addressing barriers or concerns related to financial implications and accessibility issues in care plans may help to improve these outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Shared decision making is an important aspect of high-quality health care and incorporates understanding patients' beliefs around how medication works, the potential side effects, and expected benefits. Gaining this understanding [...]

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2005.04.001 Byline: Suzanna M. Zick (a), Amy Blume (a), Daniel Normolle (b), Mack Ruffin (a)(c) Abstract: To assess methods to blind study participants to encapsulated ginger (Zingiber officinale). Author Affiliation: (a) University of Michigan, Department of Family Medicine, 715 East Huron Street, Suite 1W, Ann Arbor, MI 48104, USA (b) University of Michigan, Comprehensive, Cancer Center Biostatistics Unit, USA (c) University of Michigan Medical School, Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, USA