Excess weight and unhealthy behaviours (sedentariness, high alcohol and suboptimal diet) are common among women attending breast screening. These factors increase the risk of breast cancer and other diseases. We tested the feasibility and acceptability of a weight loss/ behaviour change programme framed to reduce breast cancer risk (breast cancer prevention programme, BCPP) compared to one framed to reduce risk of breast cancer, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes (T2D) (multiple disease prevention programme, MDPP). Methods Women aged 47-73 years with overweight or obesity (n=1356) in the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) were randomized (1:2) to be invited to join a BCPP or a MDPP. The BCPP included personalised information on individual level of breast cancer risk and a web and phone weight loss/behaviour change intervention. The MDPP also included an NHS Health Check (lipids, blood pressure, HbA1c and personalised feedback for risk of CVD [QRISK2] and T2D [QDiabetes and HbA1c]). Uptake, retention, change in weight, and potential harms (anxiety and self-rated health) were assessed, along with the numbers in the MDPP with previously unknown CVD and T2D risk.ResultsThe BCPP and MDPP had comparable rates of uptake; 45/508 (9%) vs. 81/848 (10%) 12-month retention; 33/45 (73%) vs. 53/81 (65%) and numbers (%) losing ≥5% body weight at 12 months; 26/45 (58%) vs. 46/81 (57%) with baseline observation carried forward imputation. Both groups experienced reductions in state anxiety score; BCPP (n=37) -0.7 (-4.6 to 3.2), MDPP (n=60) -3.5 (-6.7 to -0.4) and an increase in the EQ-5D-5L score; BCPP (n=40) 4.1 (0.6 to 7.6), MDPP (n=60) 7.3 (3.6 to 11.1). The MDPP identified 15% of women with a previously unknown 10 year CVD QRISK2 of ≥10% and 56% with 10-year Qdiabetes risk of ≥10%.ConclusionsThe MDPP identified previously unknown CVD and T2D risk factors but does not appear to increase engagement with behaviour change beyond a standard BCPP amongst women attending breast screening. The results suggest a definitive effectiveness trial of the BCPP intervention is warranted, with acceptable uptake and retention, and a clear weight loss signal.Trial Registration ISRCTN91372184, https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN91372184, registered 28 September 2014.

Background Excess weight and unhealthy behaviours (e.g. sedentariness, high alcohol) are common amongst women including those attending breast screening. These factors increase the risk of breast cancer and other diseases. We tested the feasibility and acceptability of a weight loss/behaviour change programme framed to reduce breast cancer risk (breast cancer prevention programme, BCPP) compared to one framed to reduce risk of breast cancer, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes (T2D) (multiple disease prevention programme, MDPP). Methods Women aged 47-73 years with overweight or obesity (n = 1356) in the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) were randomised (1:2) to be invited to join a BCPP or a MDPP. The BCPP included personalised information on breast cancer risk and a web and phone weight loss/behaviour change intervention. The MDPP also included an NHS Health Check (lipids, blood pressure, HbA1c and personalised feedback for risk of CVD [QRISK2] and T2D [QDiabetes and HbA1c]). Primary outcomes were uptake and retention and other feasibility outcomes which include intervention fidelity and prevalence of high CVD and T2D risk. Secondary outcomes included change in weight. Results The BCPP and MDPP had comparable rates of uptake: 45/508 (9%) vs. 81/848 (10%) and 12-month retention; 33/45 (73%) vs. 53/81 (65%). Both programmes had a high fidelity of delivery with receipt of mean (95% CI) 90 (88-98% of scheduled calls, 91 (86-95%) of scheduled e-mails and 89 (76-102) website entries per woman over the 12-month period. The MDPP identified 15% of women with a previously unknown 10-year CVD QRISK2 of ≥ 10% and 56% with 10-year Qdiabetes risk of ≥ 10%. Both groups experienced good comparable weight loss: BCPP 26/45 (58%) and MDPP 46/81 (57%) with greater than 5% weight loss at 12 months using baseline observation carried forward imputation. Conclusions Both programmes appeared feasible. The MDPP identified previously unknown CVD and T2D risk factors but does not appear to increase engagement with behaviour change beyond a standard BCPP amongst women attending breast screening. A future definitive effectiveness trial of BCPP is supported by acceptable uptake and retention, and good weight loss. Trial registration ISRCTN91372184, registered 28 September 2014.

Background Excess adiposity at diagnosis and weight gain during chemotherapy is associated with tumour recurrence and chemotherapy toxicity. We assessed the efficacy of intermittent energy restriction (IER) vs continuous energy restriction (CER) for weight control and toxicity reduction during chemotherapy. Methods One hundred and seventy-two women were randomised to follow IER or CER throughout adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Primary endpoints were weight and body fat change. Secondary endpoints included chemotherapy toxicity, cardiovascular risk markers, and correlative markers of metabolism, inflammation and oxidative stress. Results Primary analyses showed non-significant reductions in weight (−1.1 (−2.4 to +0.2) kg, p = 0.11) and body fat (−1.0 (−2.1 to +0.1) kg, p = 0.086) in IER compared with CER. Predefined secondary analyses adjusted for body water showed significantly greater reductions in weight (−1.4 (−2.5 to −0.2) kg, p = 0.024) and body fat (−1.1 (−2.1 to −0.2) kg, p = 0.046) in IER compared with CER. Incidence of grade 3/4 toxicities were comparable overall (IER 31.0 vs CER 36.5%, p = 0.45) with a trend to fewer grade 3/4 toxicities with IER (18%) vs CER (31%) during cycles 4–6 of primarily taxane therapy (p = 0.063). Conclusions IER is feasible during chemotherapy. The potential efficacy for weight control and reducing toxicity needs to be tested in future larger trials. Clinical trial registration ISRCTN04156504.

Background Overweight and obesity are common amongst women attending breast cancer Family History, Risk and Prevention Clinics (FHRPCs). Overweight increases risk of breast cancer (BC) and conditions including1 cardiovascular disease (CVD) and type-2 diabetes (T2D). Clinics provide written health behaviour advice with is likely to have minimal effects. We assessed efficacy of two remotely delivered weight loss programmes vs. written advice. Method 210 women with overweight or obesity attending three UK FHRPCs were randomised to either a BC prevention programme (BCPP) framed to reduce risk of BC (n = 86), a multiple disease prevention programme (MDPP) framed to reduce risk of BC, CVD and T2D (n = 87), or written advice (n = 37). Change in weight and health behaviours were assessed at 12-months. Results Weight loss at 12 months was −6.3% (−8.2, −4.5) in BCPP, −6.0% (−7.9, −4.2) in MDPP and −3.3% (−6.2, −0.5) in the written group (p = 0.451 across groups). The percentage losing ≥10% weight in these groups were respectively 34%, 23% and 14% (p = 0.038 across groups). Discussion BCPP and MDPP programmes resulted in more women achieving ≥10% weight loss, but no evidence of additional benefits of MDPP. A multicentre RCT to test the BCPP across UK FHRPCs is warranted. Clinical Trial Registration ISRCTN16431108.

IntroductionObesity and overweight are strong potentially modifiable risk factors for postmenopausal breast and endometrial cancer. Bariatric surgery can achieve considerable weight loss and risk reduction of weight-related cancer but is unlikely to be a feasible cancer prevention strategy. Total diet replacement (TDR) can also lead to significant weight reduction. This study aims to examine the cellular and molecular changes in breast and endometrial tissue in high-risk women following TDR-induced weight loss, as well as longer-term adherence to a 12-month TDR weight loss intervention.Methods and analysisPROBE-TDR (PRevention Of Breast and Endometrial cancer using Total Diet Replacement) is a prospective, non-blinded, randomised controlled trial of 47 women at increased risk of breast and/or endometrial cancer. Randomisation is 2:1 to either an immediate 12-month TDR weight loss programme (n=31) or delayed dietary intervention (control) (n=16). The TDR programme includes an initial 12-week period of TDR (850 kcal/day) followed by a 40-week food-based diet, based on the nutritional principles of a Mediterranean diet, as either continued weight loss (~1500 kcal/day) or weight loss maintenance (~2000 kcal/day). Menstrual phase-matched biopsies of the breast and endometrium will be assessed at baseline and at the end of the 12-week TDR in the immediate diet group, compared with women randomised to the control group following their usual diet. The trial will also assess longer-term adherence and weight loss success across the 12-month programme in both the immediate and control groups.Ethics and disseminationApproval for this study has been obtained from the Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales (approval 20/NW/0095). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and shared with trial participants.Trial registration numberInternational Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry (ISRCTN15358157).