Three main nutritional objectives should be attained to improve cancer prevention: to reduce alcoholic beverages consumption, to have a balanced and diversified diet and to be physically active.

Analysis CMAJ• Guidelines for sensible drinking are based on the short-term effects of consuming alcohol, such as social and psychological problems or admissions to hospital, and disregard the dose-response relationship between alcohol consumption and cancer risk.• The current guidelines for sensible drinking for the general population are not adequate for the prevention of cancer.• Revised guidelines that are based on complete and up-to-date scientific evidence are needed.

No abstract

The French National Cancer Institute conducted a collective expertise study with researchers and clinical experts from the French Network for Nutrition And Cancer Research (NACRe Network). The objective was to update the state of knowledge on the impacts of nutritional factors on clinical endpoints during or after cancer. Data from 150 meta-analyses, pooled analyses or intervention trials and 93 cohort studies were examined; they concerned 8 nutritional factors, 6 clinical events and 20 cancer locations. This report shows that some nutritional factors have impacts on mortality and on the risks of recurrence or second primary cancer in cancer patients. Therefore, high-risk nutritional conditions can be encountered for certain cancer sites: from the diagnosis and throughout the health care pathways, weight loss (lung and esophageal cancers), malnutrition (lung, esophageal, colorectal, pancreatic, gastric and liver cancers), weight gain (colorectal, breast and kidney cancers) and alcohol consumption (upper aerodigestive cancers) should be monitored; and after cancer treatments, excess weight should be detected (colorectal, breast and kidney cancers). These situations require nutritional assessments, and even support or management by health care professionals, in the context of tertiary prevention. This report also highlights some limitations regarding the existing literature and some needs for future research.

Background: Differences in weight status by socioeconomic position occur during adolescence and is known as weight social gradient (WSG). The PRALIMAP (Promotion de l'ALIMentation et de l'Activité Physique) trial highlighted that a universal intervention was effective in reducing overweight and obesity prevalence among adolescents. However, its ability to reduce the WSG is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the PRALIMAP intervention on the WSG among adolescents. Methods: Data were obtained from 3504 adolescents who participated in the school-based PRALIMAP trial between 2006 and 2009. The PRALIMAP study consisted of three interventional strategies: educational, environmental, screening and care. Weight status was assessed by body mass index (BMI) z-score and overweight and obesity prevalence. The ''indice de position sociale des élèves'' was used to measure adolescents' socioeconomic status. Linear regression and hierarchical models were used to assess the WSG and its evolution, respectively. Results: Among all adolescents (14-18 years old), significant WSG was identified at baseline: BMI z-score (b =-0.06; p < 0.0001), overweight and obesity prevalence (b =-2.86; p < 0.0001). Overall, the intervention conferred no significant reduction in the WSG: BMI z-score (b =-0.01 [-0.02 to 0.01], p = 0.48), overweight and obesity prevalence (b =-0.01 [-0.07 to 0.05], p = 0.73). Similar results were observed for adolescents whatever the interventional strategy they benefited from in the PRALIMAP trial. Conclusions: This study provided no evidence that the PRALIMAP universal intervention was effective in reducing the socioeconomic inequalities in weight status among adolescents. Different interventions that account for social differences should be considered to tackle these inequalities.