寻找适合规模的减肥干预措施:一刀切能行吗?从 EQUAL 试验中汲取的经验教训。

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Travis R Moore, Wendy Demark-Wahnefried
{"title":"寻找适合规模的减肥干预措施:一刀切能行吗?从 EQUAL 试验中汲取的经验教训。","authors":"Travis R Moore, Wendy Demark-Wahnefried","doi":"10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-0735","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Overweight and obesity affect 71.2% of adults in the United States, with cancer survivors not far behind at 70.3%. Subgroups such as those diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) face even greater challenges. The Exercise and Quality Diet after Leukemia (EQUAL) trial sought to address weight management issues among ALL survivors by implementing a remotely delivered weight loss intervention, leveraging the previously proven Practice-based Opportunities for Weight Reduction (POWER) program. Despite a strong foundation and design, the EQUAL trial yielded null results. Key differences in study populations and intervention contexts between the EQUAL and POWER trials, such as the lack of primary care physician involvement in EQUAL, contributed to these outcomes. EQUAL's failure to meet its accrual target and poor adherence among participants highlighted challenges in engaging this unique population. Contrary to EQUAL's conclusions, evidence from other studies supports the efficacy of remote interventions for weight loss among cancer survivors. The lack of qualitative assessment among ALL survivors and key integration to inform intervention adaptations undermined EQUAL's impact. However, EQUAL's impressive retention rate offers valuable insights. Lessons from EQUAL underscore the need for well-fitted, remotely delivered interventions and the importance of thoughtfully adapted and tailored approaches to specific survivor populations. See related article by Fiedmann et al., p. 1158.</p>","PeriodicalId":9458,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Searching for the Scale-Able Weight Loss Intervention: Can One Size Fit All? Lessons to Be Learned from the EQUAL Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Travis R Moore, Wendy Demark-Wahnefried\",\"doi\":\"10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-0735\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Overweight and obesity affect 71.2% of adults in the United States, with cancer survivors not far behind at 70.3%. Subgroups such as those diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) face even greater challenges. The Exercise and Quality Diet after Leukemia (EQUAL) trial sought to address weight management issues among ALL survivors by implementing a remotely delivered weight loss intervention, leveraging the previously proven Practice-based Opportunities for Weight Reduction (POWER) program. Despite a strong foundation and design, the EQUAL trial yielded null results. Key differences in study populations and intervention contexts between the EQUAL and POWER trials, such as the lack of primary care physician involvement in EQUAL, contributed to these outcomes. EQUAL's failure to meet its accrual target and poor adherence among participants highlighted challenges in engaging this unique population. Contrary to EQUAL's conclusions, evidence from other studies supports the efficacy of remote interventions for weight loss among cancer survivors. The lack of qualitative assessment among ALL survivors and key integration to inform intervention adaptations undermined EQUAL's impact. However, EQUAL's impressive retention rate offers valuable insights. Lessons from EQUAL underscore the need for well-fitted, remotely delivered interventions and the importance of thoughtfully adapted and tailored approaches to specific survivor populations. See related article by Fiedmann et al., p. 1158.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9458,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-0735\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-0735","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在美国,71.2% 的成年人患有超重和肥胖症,癌症幸存者也不遑多让,达到 70.3%。被诊断为急性淋巴细胞白血病(ALL)的患者等亚群面临着更大的挑战。白血病后的运动和优质饮食(EQUAL)试验试图通过实施远程提供的减肥干预措施来解决急性淋巴细胞白血病(ALL)幸存者的体重管理问题,该试验利用了之前经过验证的 "基于实践的减重机会(POWER)"计划。尽管 EQUAL 试验具有坚实的基础和设计,但其结果却是无效的。EQUAL试验和POWER试验在研究人群和干预环境上的主要差异,如EQUAL试验中缺乏初级保健医生的参与,都是造成这些结果的原因。EQUAL 试验未能达到预期目标,参与者的依从性也很差,这些都凸显了让这一特殊人群参与试验所面临的挑战。与 EQUAL 的结论相反,来自其他研究的证据支持远程干预对癌症幸存者减肥的有效性。由于缺乏对所有癌症幸存者的定性评估和关键整合来为干预措施的调整提供信息,EQUAL 的效果大打折扣。不过,EQUAL 令人印象深刻的保留率提供了宝贵的启示。从 EQUAL 中汲取的经验强调了对适合的远程干预措施的需求,以及针对特定幸存者群体进行深思熟虑的调整和定制方法的重要性。参见 Fiedmann 等人的相关文章,第 1158 页。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Searching for the Scale-Able Weight Loss Intervention: Can One Size Fit All? Lessons to Be Learned from the EQUAL Trial.

Overweight and obesity affect 71.2% of adults in the United States, with cancer survivors not far behind at 70.3%. Subgroups such as those diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) face even greater challenges. The Exercise and Quality Diet after Leukemia (EQUAL) trial sought to address weight management issues among ALL survivors by implementing a remotely delivered weight loss intervention, leveraging the previously proven Practice-based Opportunities for Weight Reduction (POWER) program. Despite a strong foundation and design, the EQUAL trial yielded null results. Key differences in study populations and intervention contexts between the EQUAL and POWER trials, such as the lack of primary care physician involvement in EQUAL, contributed to these outcomes. EQUAL's failure to meet its accrual target and poor adherence among participants highlighted challenges in engaging this unique population. Contrary to EQUAL's conclusions, evidence from other studies supports the efficacy of remote interventions for weight loss among cancer survivors. The lack of qualitative assessment among ALL survivors and key integration to inform intervention adaptations undermined EQUAL's impact. However, EQUAL's impressive retention rate offers valuable insights. Lessons from EQUAL underscore the need for well-fitted, remotely delivered interventions and the importance of thoughtfully adapted and tailored approaches to specific survivor populations. See related article by Fiedmann et al., p. 1158.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.60%
发文量
538
审稿时长
1.6 months
期刊介绍: Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention publishes original peer-reviewed, population-based research on cancer etiology, prevention, surveillance, and survivorship. The following topics are of special interest: descriptive, analytical, and molecular epidemiology; biomarkers including assay development, validation, and application; chemoprevention and other types of prevention research in the context of descriptive and observational studies; the role of behavioral factors in cancer etiology and prevention; survivorship studies; risk factors; implementation science and cancer care delivery; and the science of cancer health disparities. Besides welcoming manuscripts that address individual subjects in any of the relevant disciplines, CEBP editors encourage the submission of manuscripts with a transdisciplinary approach.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信