Dietary patterns may play an important role in musculoskeletal well-being. However, the link between dietary patterns, the components of patients’ diet, and chronic musculoskeletal pain remains unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this review was to systematically review the literature on the link between dietary patterns, the components of patients’ diet and chronic musculoskeletal pain. This review was conducted following the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses” (PRISMA) guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO with the registration number CRD42018110782. PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase online databases were searched. After screening titles and abstracts of 20,316 articles and full texts of 347 articles, 12 eligible articles were included in this review, consisting of nine experimental and three observational studies. Seven out of nine experimental studies reported a pain-relieving effect of dietary changes. Additionally, protein, fat, and sugar intake were found to be associated with pain intensity and pain threshold. In conclusion, plant-based diets might have pain relieving effects on chronic musculoskeletal pain. Patients with chronic rheumatoid arthritis pain can show inadequate intake of calcium, folate, zinc, magnesium, and vitamin B6, whilst patients with fibromyalgia can show a lower intake of carbohydrates, proteins, lipids, vitamin A-E-K, folate, selenium, and zinc. Chronic pain severity also shows a positive relation with fat and sugar intake in osteoarthritis, and pain threshold shows a positive association with protein intake in fibromyalgia.

Nociplastic pain syndromes include particular fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome, headache, complex regional pain syndrome, and idiopathic orofacial pain. Several mechanisms have been proposed to account for nociplastic pain including central sensitisation, alterations of pain modulatory controls, epigenetic changes, and peripheral mechanisms. Importantly, nociplastic pain might also be present in patients with cancer pain, particularly those with pain related to complications of cancer treatment. Increased awareness of nociplastic pain associated with cancer should have important implications for monitoring and managing such patients.

This review discusses chronic pain, multiple modifiable lifestyle factors, such as stress, insomnia, diet, obesity, smoking, alcohol consumption and physical activity, and the relationship between these lifestyle factors and pain after cancer. Chronic pain is known to be a common consequence of cancer treatments, which considerably impacts cancer survivors’ quality of life when it remains untreated. Improvements in lifestyle behaviour are known to reduce mortality, comorbid conditions (i.e., cardiovascular diseases, other cancer, and recurrence) and cancer-related side-effects (i.e., fatigue and psychological issues). An inadequate stress response plays an important role in dysregulating the body’s autonomic, endocrine, and immune responses, creating a problematic back loop with pain. Next, given the high vulnerability of cancer survivors to insomnia, addressing and treating those sleep problems should be another target in pain management due to its capacity to increase hyperalgesia. Furthermore, adherence to a healthy diet holds great anti-inflammatory potential for relieving pain after cancer. Additionally, a healthy diet might go hand in hand with weight reduction in the case of obesity. Consuming alcohol and smoking have an acute analgesic effect in the short-term, with evidence lacking in the long-term. However, this acute effect is outweighed by other harms on cancer survivors’ general health. Last, informing patients about the benefits of an active lifestyle and reducing a sedentary lifestyle after cancer treatment must be emphasised when considering the proven benefits of physical activity in this population. A multimodal approach addressing all relevant lifestyle factors together seems appropriate for managing comorbid conditions, side-effects, and chronic pain after cancer. Further research is needed to evaluate whether modifiable lifestyle factors have a beneficial influence on chronic pain among cancer survivors.

Evidence for the relationship between chronic pain and nutrition is mounting, and chronic pain following cancer is gaining recognition as a significant area for improving health care in the cancer survivorship population. This review explains why nutrition should be considered to be an important component in chronic pain management in cancer survivors by exploring relevant evidence from the literature and how to translate this knowledge into clinical practice. This review was built on relevant evidence from both human and pre-clinical studies identified in PubMed, Web of Science and Embase databases. Given the relationship between chronic pain, inflammation, and metabolism found in the literature, it is advised to look for a strategic dietary intervention in cancer survivors. Dietary interventions may result in weight loss, a healthy body weight, good diet quality, systemic inflammation, and immune system regulations, and a healthy gut microbiota environment, all of which may alter the pain-related pathways and mechanisms. In addition to being a cancer recurrence or prevention strategy, nutrition may become a chronic pain management modality for cancer survivors. Although additional research is needed before implementing nutrition as an evidence-based management modality for chronic pain in cancer survivors, it is already critical to counsel and inform this patient population about the importance of a healthy diet based on the data available so far.

Background: Impaired glucose regulation is suggested to be related to chronic low back pain (CLBP), although it is not clear how they interact with each other. Thus, the primary aim of this study was to investigate differences in postprandial glycemic responses (PPGRs) (the first sign of impaired glucose metabolism) to high- (sucrose) and low-glycemic index (GI) (isomaltulose) beverages in normoglycemic women with CLBP and healthy controls (HCs) and explore whether any group that showed greater PPGRs to high-GI beverage intake would benefit when the high-GI beverage was replaced with a low-GI beverage. Secondly, this study aimed to explore the association between PPGR and pain in patients with CLBP. Methods: This study was registered at clinicaltrials.org (NCT04459104) before the start of the study. In this study, 53 CLBP patients and 53 HCs were recruited. After 11–12 h of fasting, each participant randomly received isomaltulose or sucrose. Blood glucose levels were measured during the fasting state and 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, and 120 min after the beverage intake, and each participant underwent experimental pain measures. Results: Compared to the HCs, the CLBP group showed significantly higher PPGRs to sucrose (p < 0.021). Additionally, the CLBP group showed a significantly higher decrease in PPGR (p = 0.045) when comparing PPGR to sucrose with PPGR to isomaltulose. Correlation analysis revealed a positive association between self-reported pain sensitivity and PPGR to sucrose, while there was no association found between any experimental pain measures and glycemic responses. Conclusions: Overall, these findings suggest that normoglycemic CLBP patients might have a higher risk of developing impaired glucose tolerance than the HCs and might benefit more when high-GI foods are replaced with low-GI ones.