Mediterranean diet and quality of life in women treated for breast cancer: A baseline analysis of DEDiCa multicentre trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence suggests a beneficial role of the Mediterranean Diet (MedDiet) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in healthy subjects. HRQoL is relevant in cancer therapy and disease outcomes, therefore we investigated the association between adherence to the MedDiet and HRQoL in breast cancer survivors participating in the multicentre trial DEDiCa. Diet and HRQoL were assessed at baseline in a subgroup of 309 women enrolled within 12 months of breast cancer diagnosis without metastasis (stages I-III, mean age 52±1 yrs, BMI 27±7 kg/m2). The 14-item PREDIMED questionnaire was used to analyse adherence to the MedDiet. HRQoL was assessed with three validated questionnaires measuring physical, mental, emotional and social factors: EQ-5D-3L, EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BR23. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multivariate analyses were performed to assess the possible role of the MedDiet on HRQoL. Patients with higher adherence to MedDiet (PREDIMED score >7) showed significantly higher scores for physical functioning (p = 0.02) and lower scores on the symptomatic pain scale (p = 0.04) assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire compared to patients with a lower adherence to MedDiet (PREDIMED score ≤7). Higher scores from the EQ-5D-3L indicating higher well-being were observed mainly in participants with higher MedDiet adherence (p = 0.05). In adjusted multivariate analyses significant positive associations were found between MedDiet, physical functioning (p = 0.001) and EQ 5D-3L score (p = 0.003) while inverse associations were found with pain and insomnia symptoms (p = 0.005 and p = 0.029, respectively). These results suggest that higher adherence to the MedDiet in breast cancer survivors is associated with better aspects of quality of life, specifically higher physical functioning, better sleep, lower pain and generally higher well-being confirming findings in healthy subjects.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".