Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36396066›Full record

ArticleContemporary clinical trials2022

Optimizing intervention tools to improve nutrition and physical activity for colorectal cancer survivors (Tools To Be Fit): Study protocol of a randomized factorial experiment.

Stacey A Kenfield, Errol J Philip, Siobhan M Phillips, Jeffrey A Meyerhardt, June M Chan, Chloe E Atreya, Mi-Ok Kim, Quincy Harris, Paige Steiding, Greta Macaire and 8 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary clinical trials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Exercise and the gut microbiome: implications for supportive care in cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Stacey A KenfieldDepartment of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.
Errol J PhilipUCSF School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.
Siobhan M PhillipsDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States of America.
Jeffrey A MeyerhardtDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, United States of America.
June M ChanDepartment of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.
Chloe E AtreyaHelen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America; Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.
Mi-Ok KimDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America; Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.
Quincy HarrisHelen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.
Paige SteidingHelen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.
Greta MacaireHelen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.
Marjorie L McCulloughDepartment of Population Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
Sorbarikor PiawahHelen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America; Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.
Wenora Y JohnsonFight Colorectal Cancer Research Advocate, Springfield, MO, United States of America.
Florence A KurttilaFight Colorectal Cancer Research Advocate, Springfield, MO, United States of America.
Wendy L LewisFight Colorectal Cancer Research Advocate, Springfield, MO, United States of America.
Curtis PesmenFight Colorectal Cancer Research Advocate, Springfield, MO, United States of America.
Yasmeem WatsonFight Colorectal Cancer Research Advocate, Springfield, MO, United States of America.
Erin L Van BlariganDepartment of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America. Electronic address: erin.vanblarigan@ucsf.edu.
University of California, San Francisco · USUCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center · USAmerican Cancer Society · USDana-Farber Cancer Institute · USNorthwestern University · US

Funding

Optimization of a remote intervention to improve nutrition and physical activity in colorectal cancer survivorsR37CA248774 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Erin Lynn Van Blarigan · 2021 to 2026
$4.5M
NCI NIH HHS R37 CA248774
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is the 2nd leading cause of cancer death in the United States. The American Cancer Society (ACS) Nutrition and Physical Activity Guidelines are associated with longer survival among CRC survivors, but few report behaviors consistent with the guidelines.

methodsThe Tools To Be Fit study, based on the Multiphase Optimization Strategy (MOST) framework, is a full factorial experimental to optimize a remotely delivered 48-week diet and physical activity intervention for non-metastatic CRC survivors. The intervention includes a core component (booklet and personal report). CRC survivors (N = 400) are additionally randomly assigned to one of 16 combinations of four candidate components, each with 2 options: 1) text messaging (on/off); 2) self-monitoring modality (digital/paper); 3) health coaching (on/off); and 4) support person coaching (on/off). OUTCOMES: Our primary outcome is adherence to the ACS guidelines after 48 weeks using a score that includes physical activity from accelerometers, dietary intake from a food frequency questionnaire, and body mass index (BMI) measured by a technician. Secondary outcomes include the ACS score after 24 weeks and score components at 24 and 48 weeks. Exploratory outcomes include adherence and change in Social Cognitive Theory constructs. We will explore moderation by sociodemographic, clinical, and psychological/behavioral factors; and change in the ACS score in relation to change in levels of insulin, insulin sensitivity, inflammation, gut microbiome structure, fatigue, depression, and sleep disturbance. DISCUSSION: The proposed study aims to inform a randomized controlled trial to determine whether an optimized intervention reduces risk of recurrence among CRC survivors.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsColorectal NeoplasmsBody Mass IndexExerciseHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurvivorsUnited StatesColorectal cancerMultiphase optimization strategy framework (MOST)NutritionPhysical activitySurvivorshipWeight loss

Identifiers

PMID36396066
PMCPMC10561599
OpenAlexW4309478579

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.