Purpose: In the phase II DIRECT study a fasting mimicking diet (FMD) improved the clinical response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy as compared to a regular diet. Quality of Life (QoL) and illness perceptions regarding the possible side effects of chemotherapy and the FMD were secondary outcomes of the trial. Methods: 131 patients with HER2-negative stage II/III breast cancer were recruited, of whom 129 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either a fasting mimicking diet (FMD) or their regular diet for 3 days prior to and the day of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaires EORTC-QLQ-C30 and EORTC-QLQ-BR23; the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ) and the Distress Thermometer were used to assess these outcomes at baseline, halfway chemotherapy, before the last cycle of chemotherapy and 6 months after surgery. Results: Overall QoL and distress scores declined during treatment in both arms and returned to baseline values 6 months after surgery. However, patients’ perceptions differed slightly over time. In particular, patients receiving the FMD were less concerned and had better understanding of the possible adverse effects of their treatment in comparison with patients on a regular diet. Per-protocol analyses yielded better emotional, physical, role, cognitive and social functioning scores as well as lower fatigue, nausea and insomnia symptom scores for patients adherent to the FMD in comparison with non-adherent patients and patients on their regular diet. Conclusions: FMD as an adjunct to neoadjuvant chemotherapy appears to improve certain QoL and illness perception domains in patients with HER2-negative breast cancer. Trialregister ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02126449.

Background: Previous preclinical and clinical research has investigated the role of intestinal microbiota in carcinogenesis. Growing evidence exists that intestinal microbiota can influence breast cancer carcinogenesis. However, the role of intestinal microbiota in breast cancer needs to be further investigated. This study aimed to identify the microbiota differences between postmenopausal breast cancer patients and controls. Patients and methods: This prospective cohort study compared the intestinal microbiota richness, diversity, and composition in postmenopausal histologically proven ER+/HER2- breast cancer patients and postmenopausal controls. Patients scheduled for (neo)adjuvant adriamycin, cyclophosphamide (AC), and docetaxel (D), or endocrine therapy (tamoxifen) were prospectively enrolled in a multicentre cohort study in the Netherlands. Patients collected a faecal sample and completed a questionnaire before starting systemic cancer treatment. Controls, enrolled from the National Dutch Breast Cancer Screening Programme, also collected a faecal sample and completed a questionnaire. Intestinal microbiota was analysed by amplicon sequencing of the 16S rRNA V4 gene region. Results: In total, 81 postmenopausal ER+/HER2- breast cancer patients and 67 postmenopausal controls were included, resulting in 148 faecal samples. Observed species richness, Shannon index, and overall microbial community structure were not significantly different between breast cancer patients and controls. There was a significant difference in overall microbial community structure between breast cancer patients scheduled for adjuvant treatment, neoadjuvant treatment, and controls at the phylum (p = 0.042) and genus levels (p = 0.015). Dialister (p = 0.001) and its corresponding family Veillonellaceae (p = 0.001) were higher in patients scheduled for adjuvant treatment, compared to patients scheduled for neoadjuvant treatment. Additional sensitivity analysis to correct for the potential confounding effect of prophylactic antibiotic use, indicated no differences in microbial community structure between patients scheduled for neoadjuvant systemic treatment, adjuvant systemic treatment, and controls at the phylum (p = 0.471) and genus levels (p = 0.124). Conclusions: Intestinal microbiota richness, diversity, and composition are not different between postmenopausal breast cancer patients and controls. The increased relative abundance of Dialister and Veillonellaceae was observed in breast cancer patients scheduled for adjuvant treatment, which might be caused by a relative decrease in other bacteria due to prophylactic antibiotic administration rather than an absolute increase.

Purpose: We assessed the uptake of fertility preservation (FP), recovery of ovarian function (OFR) after chemotherapy, live birth after breast cancer, and breast cancer outcomes in women with early-stage breast cancer. Methods: Women aged below 41 years and referred to our center for FP counseling between 2008 and 2015 were included. Data on patient and tumor characteristics, ovarian function, cryopreservation (embryo/oocyte) and transfer, live birth, and disease-free survival were collected. Kaplan–Meier analyses were performed for time-to-event analyses including competing risk analyses, and patients with versus without FP were compared using the logrank test. Results: Of 118 counseled women with a median age of 31 years (range 19–40), 34 (29%) chose FP. Women who chose FP had less often children, more often a male partner and more often favorable tumor characteristics. The 5-year OFR rate was 92% for the total group of counseled patients. In total, 26 women gave birth. The 5-year live birth rate was 27% for the total group of counseled patients. Only three women applied for transfer of their cryopreserved embryo(s), in two combined with preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) because of BRCA1-mutation carrier ship. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 91% versus 88%, for patients with versus without FP (P = 0.42). Conclusions: Remarkably, most women achieved OFR, probably related to the young age at diagnosis. Most pregnancies occurred spontaneously, two of three women applied for embryo transfer because of the opportunity to apply for PGD.

There is increasing recognition of the delicate balance between the modest benefits of palliative chemotherapy and the burden of treatment. Decision aids (DAs) can potentially help patients with advanced cancer with these difficult treatment decisions, but providing detailed information could have an adverse impact on patients' well-being. The objective of this randomised phase II study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DAs for patients with advanced cancer considering second-line chemotherapy. Patients with advanced breast or colorectal cancer considering second-line treatment were randomly assigned to usual care (control group) or usual care plus a DA (intervention group) in a 1:2 ratio. A nurse offered a DA with information on adverse events, tumour response and survival. Outcome measures included patient-reported well-being (primary outcome: anxiety) and quality of the decision-making process and the resulting choice. Of 128 patients randomised, 45 were assigned to the control group and 83 to the intervention group. Median age was 62 years (range 32-81), 63% were female, and 73% had colorectal cancer. The large majority of patients preferred treatment with chemotherapy (87%) and subsequently commenced treatment with chemotherapy (86%). No adverse impact on patients' well-being was found and nurses reported that consultations in which the DAs were offered went well. Being offered the DA was associated with stronger treatment preferences (3.0 vs. 2.5; p=0.030) and increased subjective knowledge (6.7 vs. 6.3; p=0.022). Objective knowledge, risk perception and perceived involvement were comparable between the groups. DAs containing detailed risk information on second-line palliative treatment could be delivered to patients with advanced cancer without having an adverse impact on patient well-being. Surprisingly, the DAs only marginally improved the quality of the decision-making process. The effectiveness of DAs for palliative treatment decisions needs further exploration. Netherlands Trial Registry (NTR): NTR1113 (registered on 2 November 2007)