CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 58Cancer survivorship and careCancer Risks and FactorsObesity, Physical Activity, Diet

The Living Well after Breast Cancer™ Pilot Trial: a weight loss intervention for women following treatment for breast cancer

Open access
Reeves, Marina, Winkler, Elisabeth, Mccarthy, Nicole, Lawler, Sheleigh, Terranova, Caroline, Hayes, Sandi, Janda, Monika, Demark-Wahnefried, Wendy +1 more·2017·Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology
DOI 10.1111/ajco.12629
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Aim Obesity is associated with poor prognosis and risk of treatment side-effects in breast cancer survivors. This pilot study assessed the feasibility, acceptability, safety and efficacy of a telephone-delivered weight loss intervention, among women (BMI 25–40 kg/m2) following treatment for stage I–III breast cancer, on weight loss (primary outcome), quality of life and treatment-related side-effects (vs usual care). Methods Ninety women (mean ± SD age: 55.3 ± 8.7years; BMI: 31.0 ± 4.3 kg/m2; 15.9 ± 2.9 months postdiagnosis), recruited from a state-based cancer registry, were randomized to a weight loss (diet and physical activity) intervention (n = 45) or usual care (n = 45). Data collected at baseline and 6 months included weight, body composition, quality of life, fatigue and body image. Acceptability and satisfaction were assessed in intervention participants. Results Oncologists provided consent to contact 82.6% of patients, with 84.1% of those women contacted and eligible consenting to participate. Compared with usual care, mean weight loss was significantly greater in the intervention arm (−3.1 kg [95% CI, −5.4 to −0.7]; −3.7% baseline weight [95% CI, −6.6 to −0.9]), as were reductions in fat mass (−2.1 kg [95% CI, −4.2 to −0.1]) and waist circumference (−4.0 cm [95% CI, −6.6 to −1.3]). No other statistically significant intervention effects were observed. Participants were highly satisfied with the intervention overall and it is timing in relation to diagnosis/treatment. One reported adverse event (musculoskeletal injury) was attributable to the intervention. Conclusions This weight loss intervention was feasible, acceptable, safe and effective for women 1–2 years after a breast cancer diagnosis. The effect of weight loss on quality of life and treatment-related side-effects should be examined further in fully-powered studies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ajco.12629

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • By identifying perceived facilitators and barriers across diverse interventions and consolidating patterns from participants' experiences, strategies to promote positive behavior change, regardless of intervention framework, aims or terminology can be revealed.

    “By identifying perceived facilitators and barriers across diverse interventions and consolidating patterns from participants’ experiences [21–24], strategies to promote positive behavior change, regardless of intervention framework, aims or terminology can be revealed [15].”

    From Barriers and facilitators to diet, physical activity and lifestyle behavior intervention adherence: a qualitative systematic review of the literature (2023) · cites this paper as [23]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 48 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Reeves, M., Winkler, E., Mccarthy, N., Lawler, S., Terranova, C., Hayes, S., Janda, M., Demark-Wahnefried, W., & Eakin, E.
Affiliations
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • School of Public Health and Social Work; Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation; Queensland University of Technology; Brisbane Queensland Australia
  • Queensland University of Technology (AU)
  • Department of Nutrition Sciences; University of at Birmingham; Birmingham Alabama USA
Corresponding author
Reeves, Marina
ORCID
Venue
Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-11-10
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
125-136
ISSN
1743-7555 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1111/ajco.12629
OpenAlex
W2555275656
Cited by
58
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
FWCI
2.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Faculty of Health
Funders
  • University of Queensland (Early Career Researcher grant)
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
  • National Breast Cancer Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Risks and Factors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Keywords
breast cancer survivors, weight loss interventions, obesity, telephone-delivered intervention, diet and physical activity, quality of life, treatment side effects, fatigue, body image, body composition, fat mass, waist circumference, feasibility and acceptability
MeSH terms
Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Quality of Life, Weight Loss, Survivors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review