Nmab 132
Nmab 132
Nmab 132
ABSTRACT
Almost 40% of the adult population in the USA will be diagnosed with cancer in their lifetime. Diet is a modifiable factor which is known to
affect cancer risk and recurrence. Yet, little is known about how diet influences cancer treatment outcomes. Intermittent fasting, characterized
by periods of abstaining from foods and beverages alternated with periods of ad libitum intake, when adopted in the context of chemotherapy,
has shown promise in preclinical models resulting in decreased vomiting, diarrhea, visible discomfort, and improved insulin sensitivity and efficacy
of chemotherapeutic treatment. Although intermittent fasting during receipt of chemotherapy has been well-established in preclinical models,
limited numbers of human studies are now being reported. This review aims to survey the current data examining the effect of intermittent
fasting on chemotherapy efficacy, patient treatment outcomes, patient centered outcomes, and circulating biomarkers associated with cancer.
Available data show that periodic fasting, a form of intermittent fasting, may hold potential to improve the effectiveness of chemotherapy, decrease
treatment-related side effects and cancer-promoting factors such as insulin, while ameliorating treatment-related decreases in quality of life and
daily functioning. Larger controlled periodic fasting trials, including exploration of alternate forms of intermittent fasting, are needed to better
elucidate the effect of intermittent fasting on treatment and patient outcomes during chemotherapy. Adv Nutr 2022;13:667–680.
Statement of Significance: This article reviews the most current data in intermittent fasting during chemotherapy, elucidates current gaps
in clinical research, and introduces future directions for utilizing fasting as adjunct intervention during chemotherapy.
Keywords: intermittent fasting, fasting mimicking diet, short-term fasting, cancer, chemotherapy
C The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society for Nutrition. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com. Adv
(Continued)
Neurological adverse
Author Subjects Treatment and design Treatment efficacy GI adverse effects effects Quality of life
Gabel et al.
Short-term fasting
Bauersfeld et al., n = 34 females with A. Group A: STF (36 h before, A. ↑ FACT-G, FACIT F,
2018 (40) gynecologic cancers, 24 h after)/Control FACIT-F TOI
various forms of B. Group B: during fasting
chemotherapy control/STFrandomized cycles. ↑QOL
crossover trial, 6 cycles of during fasting
chemotherapy and decreased
during control
cycles
B. Ø between cycles
Ø difference
between fasting
cycles
de Groot et al., n = 13 HER2-negative stage A. STF (24 h before and Within-group change Ø differences between Ø differences between
2015 (41) II/III breast cancer after) γ -H2AX intensity groups in grade I/II groups in grade I/II
(histologically confirmed) B. Control (follow healthy ↑CD45 + CD13- or III/IV grade or III/IV grade
receiving neoadjuvant nutrition guidelines with myeloid cells toxicities using the toxicities using the
TAC a minimum of 2 pieces of (30 min) in control CTCAE CTCAE
(docetaxel/doxorubicin fruit per day) only∗
/cyclophosphamide) ↑CD45 + CD3 + lym-
phocytes (7 d) in
control only∗
Treatment-related side
effects in STF
↑ FT4∗
↑ Erythrocyte counts
(D7, D21) ∗
↑ Thrombocyte (D7) ∗
Dorff et al., 2016 n = 20 males and females A. 24 h STF (n = 6) For all groups after
(29) with cancer diagnosis B. 48 h STF (n = 7) chemotherapy: 2 ↓ grade I/II nausea and
prescribed C. 72 h STF (48 h before/24 pathological vomiting (test for
platinum-based h after) (n = 7) complete response, trend)∗∗
chemotherapy w/out Nonrandomized, no control 6 partial Toxicity graded using
radiation, curative or radiographic CTCAE
palliative response, 3 stable
disease
Ø difference in olive
moments (indicating
DNA damage) based
on Comet assay
(Continued)
Neurological adverse
Author Subjects Treatment and design Treatment efficacy GI adverse effects effects Quality of life
Riedinger et al., n = 20 females with A. STF (24 h before and Ø difference in Ø difference in Ø difference in Ø difference
2020 (30) gynecologic cancers with after) complete or partial treatment-related treatment-related between groups
≥6 cycles of B. Control response between toxicities via toxicities via in mean
chemotherapy groups∗∗ CTCAE∗∗ CTCAE∗∗ NCCN-FACT
Multiagent chemotherapy Randomized control trial ↑ Platelet count in the FOSI-18 score ∗∗
(bevacizumab, STF group at week ↑ QOL# in fasting
carboplatin, cisplatin, 18∗∗ group from first
docetaxel, doxorubicin, to last cycle in the
gemcitabine, and fasting group
paclitaxel), ≥2 compared to
participants neoadjuvant control
therapy
Zorn et al., 2020 n = 30; females with A. mSTF or KD + mSTFB. Treatment-related side mSTF and KD + mSTF Ø score difference
(36) gynecologic cancers, all Control effects in STF had between group
stages, neo or adjuvant Crossover, 2–3 cycles of CTX ↓MCH∗ ↓frequent grade I/II on
chemotherapy of intervention and ↓MCV∗ stomatitis∗ EORTC QLQ-C30,
control ↓Sodium∗ ↓headaches∗ ∗ EORTC
↑Uric acid∗ ↓total toxicities∗ QLQ-CIPN20 or
↓ fT3∗ measured by CTCAE FACIT-F
↑Ft4∗
Fasting mimicking diet
de Groot et al., n = 129 patients with A. FMD (n = 65) Ø difference in toxicity Ø score difference
2020 (22) HER-2 negative stage II/III B. Control (n = 64) of treatment between group
breast cancer, Diet was 3 d prior to and ↑ radiological on
neoadjuvant FEC-T or the day of treatment. complete or partial EORTC QLQ-C30
AC-T chemotherapy Randomized control trial response in pts
following FMD∗
Miller and Payne 4/5
pathological
response more likely
in those compliant
(per-protocol) FMD
CD45 + CD3 + lym-
phocytes (7 d) ↑ in
control and ↓ in
FMD compliant (per
protocol)∗
(Continued)
Neurological adverse
Author Subjects Treatment and design Treatment efficacy GI adverse effects effects Quality of life
Lugtenberg et al., n = 129 patients with HER-2 A. FMD (n = 65) Ø differences between Ø in QLQ-C30 or
2020 (37) negative stage II/III breast B. Control (n = 64) groups QLQ-BR23
cancer Diet was 3 d prior to and Per-protocol analysis: between groups
the day of treatment. less fatigue, nausea, Per-protocol
Randomized control trial and insomnia in analysis:
those adherent to improved
FMD∗ physical, role,
emotional,
cognitive, and
social functioning
in those adherent
to FMD∗
↓fatigue & dyspnea
# in the FMD
complaint 6 mo
after treatment
1
Ø no change, ∗ Significant change within group, P <0.05; ∗∗ significant difference between groups at endpoint, no time interaction, P <0.05; # significant group × time interaction, P <0.05. AC-T, Adriamuycin Cyclophosphamine Taxol regimen;
CIPN, Chemotherapy-induced peripeheral neuropathy; CTCAE, National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events; CTX, Cyclophosphamide; EORTC, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer; FACIT-F,
Functional assessment of chronic illiness therapy fatigue; FACIT-G, Functional assessment of chronic illiness therapy general; FEC-T, Fluorouracil-Epirubicin-Cyclophosphamide-Docetaxel; FMD, fasting mimicking diet; KD + STF, ketogenic diet
combined with short-term fasting (KD 6 d prior to STF); MCH, Mean corpuscular hemoglobin; MCV, mean corpuscular volume; mSTF, modified short-term fasting (<25% of energy needs); NCCN - FACIT FOSI 18, National comprehensive cancer
network functional treatment of cancer therapy, Ovarian cancer symptom index; QOL, quality of life; QLQ, Quality of life questionaire; STF, short-term fasting; TAC, Taxotere-Adriamycin-Cytoxan regimen; TOI, Trial outcome index.