Personalized Nutrition as a Key Contributor to Improving Radiation Response in Breast Cancer
Shastri AA., Lombardo J., Okere SC., Higgins S., Smith BC., DeAngelis T.
Narrative Review, published in Int J Mol Sci (2021) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Int J Mol Sci (2021)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 35008602
- PMCID
- PMC8745527
- DOI
- 10.3390/ijms23010175
- Citations
- 7
Abstract (original English)
Understanding metabolic and immune regulation inherent to patient populations is key to improving the radiation response for our patients. To date, radiation therapy regimens are prescribed based on tumor type and stage. Patient populations who are noted to have a poor response to radiation such as those of African American descent, those who have obesity or metabolic syndrome, or senior adult oncology patients, should be considered for concurrent therapies with radiation that will improve response. Here, we explore these populations of breast cancer patients, who frequently display radiation resistance and increased mortality rates, and identify the molecular underpinnings that are, in part, responsible for the radiation response and that result in an immune-suppressive tumor microenvironment. The resulting immune phenotype is discussed to understand how antitumor immunity could be improved. Correcting nutrient deficiencies observed in these populations should be considered as a means to improve the therapeutic index of radiation therapy.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.