Searching for the Scale-Able Weight Loss Intervention: Can One Size Fit All? Lessons to Be Learned from the EQUAL Trial

Abstract

Abstract Overweight and obesity affect 71.2% of adults in the United States, with cancer survivors not far behind at 70.3%. Subgroups such as those diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) face even greater challenges. The Exercise and Quality Diet after Leukemia (EQUAL) trial sought to address weight management issues among ALL survivors by implementing a remotely delivered weight loss intervention, leveraging the previously proven Practice-based Opportunities for Weight Reduction (POWER) program. Despite a strong foundation and design, the EQUAL trial yielded null results. Key differences in study populations and intervention contexts between the EQUAL and POWER trials, such as the lack of primary care physician involvement in EQUAL, contributed to these outcomes. EQUAL’s failure to meet its accrual target and poor adherence among participants highlighted challenges in engaging this unique population. Contrary to EQUAL’s conclusions, evidence from other studies supports the efficacy of remote interventions for weight loss among cancer survivors. The lack of qualitative assessment among ALL survivors and key integration to inform intervention adaptations undermined EQUAL’s impact. However, EQUAL’s impressive retention rate offers valuable insights. Lessons from EQUAL underscore the need for well-fitted, remotely delivered interventions and the importance of thoughtfully adapted and tailored approaches to specific survivor populations. See related article by Fiedmann et al., p. 1158