Design and implementation of the Exercise for Health trial -- a pragmatic exercise intervention for women with breast cancer

Pre-post feasibility trial of a telephone-delivered exercise intervention for patients during chemotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer: the ECHO-R trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

The benefits of exercise in reducing treatment-related morbidity and improving quality of life following a primary diagnosis of cancer have been well documented and have led to exercise being recommended by oncology societies for all people with a cancer diagnosis. However, these recommendations are derived from research typically involving cohorts with more common cancers and relatively good prognosis, such as breast and prostate. Evidence from these cancers may not apply to women with recurrent ovarian cancer. Therefore, the primary objective of this trial is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a home-based, telephone-delivered exercise intervention for women undergoing chemotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Exercise During Chemotherapy for Recurrent Ovarian Cancer (ECHO-R) trial is a single-arm, phase II, pre/postintervention trial of a 6-month, telephone-delivered exercise intervention (consistent with recommended exercise oncology prescription). The target sample size is 80 women who are currently undergoing (or are scheduled to receive) chemotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer. Recruitment is through participating hospital sites in Queensland, Australia, or via self-referral. The exercise intervention comprises 12 telephone sessions over a 6-month period delivered by trial-trained exercise professionals and supplemented (where feasible) by five sessions face to face. Exercise prescription is individualised and works towards an overall goal of achieving a weekly target of 150 min of moderate-intensity, mixed-mode exercise. Assessments via self-administered survey and physical fitness and function tests occur at baseline and then at 6 and 9 months postbaseline. Data to inform feasibility and safety are recorded as case notes by the exercise professional during each session.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval for the ECHO-R trial was granted by the Metro North Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/2020/QRBW/67223) on 6 November 2020. Findings from the trial are planned to be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and both national and international exercise and oncology conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12621000042842.

Exercise during CHemotherapy for Ovarian cancer (ECHO) trial: design and implementation of a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Epidemiological evidence supports an association between higher levels of physical activity and improved cancer survival. Trial evidence is now needed to demonstrate the effect of exercise in a clinical setting. The Exercise during CHemotherapy for Ovarian cancer (ECHO) trial is a phase III, randomised controlled trial, designed to determine the effect of exercise on progression-free survival and physical well-being for patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for ovarian cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Participants (target sample size: n=500) include women with newly diagnosed primary ovarian cancer, scheduled to receive first-line chemotherapy. Consenting participants are randomly allocated (1:1) to either the exercise intervention (plus usual care) or usual care alone, with stratification for recruitment site, age, stage of disease and chemotherapy delivery (neoadjuvant vs adjuvant). The exercise intervention involves individualised exercise prescription with a weekly target of 150 minutes of moderate-intensity, mixed-mode exercise (equivalent to 450 metabolic equivalent minutes per week), delivered for the duration of first-line chemotherapy through weekly telephone sessions with a trial-trained exercise professional. The primary outcomes are progression-free survival and physical well-being. Secondary outcomes include overall survival, physical function, body composition, quality of life, fatigue, sleep, lymphoedema, anxiety, depression, chemotherapy completion rate, chemotherapy-related adverse events, physical activity levels and healthcare usage.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval for the ECHO trial (2019/ETH08923) was granted by the Sydney Local Health District Ethics Review Committee (Royal Prince Alfred Zone) on 21 November 2014. Subsequent approvals were granted for an additional 11 sites across Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory. Findings from the ECHO trial are planned to be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and international exercise and oncology conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ANZCTRN12614001311640; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=367123&isReview=true).

Impact of telehealth interventions on physiological and psychological outcomes in breast cancer survivors: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Introduction

The use of telehealth interventions has been evaluated in different perspectives in women and also supported with various clinical trials, but its overall efficacy is still ascertained. The objective of the present review is to identify, appraise and analyze randomized controlled trials on breast cancer survivors who have participated in technology-based intervention programs incorporating a wide range of physical and psychological outcome measures.

Material and methods

We conducted electronic search of the literature during last twenty years i.e., from 2001 till August 10, 2021 through four databases. Standardized mean difference with 95% confidence interval was used.

Results

A total of 56 records were included in the qualitative and 28 in quantitative analysis. Pooled results show that telehealth interventions were associated with improved quality of life (SMD 0.48, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.92, p=0.04), reduced depression (SMD -1.27, 95% CI =-2.43 to -0.10 p=0.03), low distress and less perceived stress (SMD -0.40, 95% CI =-0.68 to -0.12, p=0.005). However, no significant differences were observed on weight change (SMD -0.27, 95% CI =-2.39 to 1.86, p=0.81) and anxiety scores (SMD -0.09, 95% CI =-0.20 to 0.02, p=0.10) between the two groups. Improvement in health care competence and fitness among participants was also reported.

Conclusion

Study concludes that telehealth care is a quick, convenient and assuring approach to breast cancer care in women that can reduce treatment burden and subsequent disturbance to the lives of breast cancer survivors.

Effectiveness of Physical Activity Interventions among Rural Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This review estimated the effectiveness of behavior change interventions to increase physical activity (PA) among rural adult cancer survivors. PubMed Medline, CINAHL, and PsychINFO were systematically searched through July 2020. Two independent investigators screened citations to identify studies to increase PA in adults residing in rural areas who had received any cancer diagnosis. Meta-analyses were conducted to assess proportion of participants achieving PA goal, paired mean difference (MD) in aerobic PA and strength training, and retention from baseline to post-intervention. Seven studies met inclusion criteria encompassing a total of 722 participants (591 in intervention and 131 controls). Overall quality of evidence was low to medium. The pooled proportion of participants achieving PA goals (150-225 min/wk) was 39% [95% confidence interval (CI), 18%-62%]. The mean time spent engaging in aerobic PA increased from baseline to post-intervention (range, 6-52 weeks) by 97.7 min/wk (95% CI, 75.0-120.4), and the MD in time spent on strength training was 12.2 min/wk (95% CI, -8.3-32.8). The pooled retention rate was 82% (95% CI, 69%-92%) at 6 to 78 weeks. Because of the modest intervention effects, low quality of evidence, and small number of studies, further rigorously designed behavior change interventions, including randomized controlled trials with long-term follow up, are needed to confirm efficacy for increasing PA in rural cancer survivors and to test innovative implementation strategies to enhance reach and effectiveness.

Physical activity interventions using behaviour change theories for women with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Physical activity is a well-established strategy to alleviate breast cancer-related adverse outcomes. To optimise health benefits, behaviour change theories provide frameworks to support women in improving their physical activity. This review aimed to evaluate (i) the effects of behaviour change theory-based physical activity interventions for women with breast cancer and (ii) the application of these theories.

METHODS

Seven online databases were searched. Trials were included if randomised and controlled, involved physical activity interventions ≥ 12 weeks duration, used a behaviour change theory, and participants were < 3 years post-cancer treatment. Risk of bias and theory use were assessed. Data were synthesised narratively and meta-analysed.

RESULTS

Forty articles describing 19 trials were included. Overall risk of bias was moderately high. Post-intervention pooled effect estimates were medium for self-reported (SMD = 0.57) and objectively measured physical activity (SMD = 0.52). Most trials cited the social cognitive theory (n = 10) and transtheoretical model (n = 9). Trials rarely applied theories in their entirety, expounded on behavioural mechanisms, or tailored interventions according to behavioural constructs. The most commonly used types of behavioural techniques were goals and planning (n = 18), shaping of knowledge (n = 18), feedback and monitoring (n = 17), and comparisons of outcomes (n = 17).

CONCLUSIONS

The included trials were effective for increasing physical activity in women with breast cancer. Theories were applied using a wide range of approaches and levels of rigour, although shared the use of common behavioural techniques.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Future research may benefit breast cancer survivors by more comprehensively applying behaviour change theories, emphasising individual patient needs and goals.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from a Randomized Controlled Trial of Tailored Exercise Prescription for Women with Breast Cancer with 8-Year Follow-Up

Studies show conflicting results on whether exercise interventions to improve outcomes for women with breast cancer are cost-effective. We modelled the long-term cost-effectiveness of the Exercise for Health intervention compared with usual care. A lifetime Markov cohort model for women with early breast cancer was constructed taking a societal perspective. Data were obtained from trial, epidemiological, quality of life, and healthcare cost reports. Outcomes were calculated from 5000 Monte Carlo simulations, and one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Over the cohort's remaining life, the incremental cost for the exercise versus usual care groups were $7409 and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained were 0.35 resulting in an incremental cost per QALY ratio of AU$21,247 (95% Uncertainty Interval (UI): Dominant, AU$31,398). The likelihood that the exercise intervention was cost-effective at acceptable levels was 93.0%. The incremental cost per life year gained was AU$8894 (95% UI Dominant, AU$11,769) with a 99.4% probability of being cost effective. Findings were most sensitive to the probability of recurrence in the exercise and usual care groups, followed by the costs of out-of-pocket expenses and the model starting age. This exercise intervention for women after early-stage breast cancer is cost-effective and would be a sound investment of healthcare resources.

Translating research into practice: outcomes from the Healthy Living after Cancer partnership project

BACKGROUND

Healthy Living after Cancer (HLaC) was a national dissemination and implementation study of an evidence-based lifestyle intervention for cancer survivors. The program was imbedded into existing telephone cancer information and support services delivered by Australian state-based Cancer Councils (CC). We report here the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance of the program.

METHODS

In this phase IV study (single-group, pre-post design) participants - survivors of any type of cancer, following treatment with curative intent - received up to 12 nurse/allied health professional-led telephone health coaching calls over 6 months. Intervention delivery was grounded in motivational interviewing, with emphasis on evidence-based behaviour change strategies. Using the RE-AIM evaluation framework, primary outcomes were reach, indicators of program adoption, implementation, costs and maintenance. Secondary (effectiveness) outcomes were participant-reported anthropometric, behavioural and psychosocial variables including: weight; physical activity; dietary intake; quality-of-life; treatment side-effects; distress; and fear of cancer recurrence and participant satisfaction. Changes were evaluated using linear mixed models, including terms for timepoint (0/6 months), strata (Cancer Council), and timepoint x strata.

RESULTS

Four of 5 CCs approached participated in the study. In total, 1183 cancer survivors were referred (mostly via calls to the Cancer Council telephone information service). Of these, 90.4% were eligible and 88.7% (n = 791) of those eligible consented to participate. Retention rate was 63.4%. Participants were mostly female (88%), aged 57 years and were overweight (BMI = 28.8 ± 6.5 kg/m2). Improvements in all participant-reported outcomes (standardised effect sizes of 0.1 to 0.6) were observed (p < 0.001). The program delivery costs were on average AU$427 (US$296) per referred cancer survivor.

CONCLUSIONS

This telephone-delivered lifestyle intervention, which was feasibly implemented by Cancer Councils, led to meaningful and statistically significant improvements in cancer survivors' health and quality-of-life at a relatively low cost.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) - ACTRN12615000882527 (registered on 24/08/2015).

Interventions for promoting habitual exercise in people living with and beyond cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in the Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 9. Despite good evidence for the health benefits of regular exercise for people living with or beyond cancer, understanding how to promote sustainable exercise behaviour change in sedentary cancer survivors, particularly over the long term, is not as well understood. A large majority of people living with or recovering from cancer do not meet current exercise recommendations. Hence, reviewing the evidence on how to promote and sustain exercise behaviour is important for understanding the most effective strategies to ensure benefit in the patient population and identify research gaps.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions designed to promote exercise behaviour in sedentary people living with and beyond cancer and to address the following secondary questions: Which interventions are most effective in improving aerobic fitness and skeletal muscle strength and endurance? Which interventions are most effective in improving exercise behaviour amongst patients with different cancers? Which interventions are most likely to promote long-term (12 months or longer) exercise behaviour? What frequency of contact with exercise professionals and/or healthcare professionals is associated with increased exercise behaviour? What theoretical basis is most often associated with better behavioural outcomes? What behaviour change techniques (BCTs) are most often associated with increased exercise behaviour? What adverse effects are attributed to different exercise interventions?

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We updated our 2013 Cochrane systematic review by updating the searches of the following electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, PsycLIT/PsycINFO, SportDiscus and PEDro up to May 2018. We also searched the grey literature, trial registries, wrote to leading experts in the field and searched reference lists of included studies and other related recent systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared an exercise intervention with usual care or 'waiting list' control in sedentary people over the age of 18 with a homogenous primary cancer diagnosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

In the update, review authors independently screened all titles and abstracts to identify studies that might meet the inclusion criteria, or that could not be safely excluded without assessment of the full text (e.g. when no abstract is available). We extracted data from all eligible papers with at least two members of the author team working independently (RT, LS and RG). We coded BCTs according to the CALO-RE taxonomy. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane's tool for assessing risk of bias. When possible, and if appropriate, we performed a fixed-effect meta-analysis of study outcomes. If statistical heterogeneity was noted, a meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. For continuous outcomes (e.g. cardiorespiratory fitness), we extracted the final value, the standard deviation (SD) of the outcome of interest and the number of participants assessed at follow-up in each treatment arm, to estimate the standardised mean difference (SMD) between treatment arms. SMD was used, as investigators used heterogeneous methods to assess individual outcomes. If a meta-analysis was not possible or was not appropriate, we narratively synthesised studies. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach with the GRADE profiler.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 studies in this review, involving a total of 1372 participants (an addition of 10 studies, 724 participants from the original review); 227 full texts were screened in the update and 377 full texts were screened in the original review leaving 35 publications from a total of 23 unique studies included in the review. We planned to include all cancers, but only studies involving breast, prostate, colorectal and lung cancer met the inclusion criteria. Thirteen studies incorporated a target level of exercise that could meet current recommendations for moderate-intensity aerobic exercise (i.e.150 minutes per week); or resistance exercise (i.e. strength training exercises at least two days per week).Adherence to exercise interventions, which is crucial for understanding treatment dose, is still reported inconsistently. Eight studies reported intervention adherence of 75% or greater to an exercise prescription that met current guidelines. These studies all included a component of supervision: in our analysis of BCTs we designated these studies as 'Tier 1 trials'. Six studies reported intervention adherence of 75% or greater to an aerobic exercise goal that was less than the current guideline recommendations: in our analysis of BCTs we designated these studies as 'Tier 2 trials.' A hierarchy of BCTs was developed for Tier 1 and Tier 2 trials, with programme goal setting, setting of graded tasks and instruction of how to perform behaviour being amongst the most frequent BCTs. Despite the uncertainty surrounding adherence in some of the included studies, interventions resulted in improvements in aerobic exercise tolerance at eight to 12 weeks (SMD 0.54, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.70; 604 participants, 10 studies; low-quality evidence) versus usual care. At six months, aerobic exercise tolerance was also improved (SMD 0.56, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.72; 591 participants; 7 studies; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review, none of the new relevant studies have provided additional information to change the conclusions. We have found some improved understanding of how to encourage previously inactive cancer survivors to achieve international physical activity guidelines. Goal setting, setting of graded tasks and instruction of how to perform behaviour, feature in interventions that meet recommendations targets and report adherence of 75% or more. However, long-term follow-up data are still limited, and the majority of studies are in white women with breast cancer. There are still a considerable number of published studies with numerous and varied issues related to high risk of bias and poor reporting standards. Additionally, the meta-analyses were often graded as consisting of low- to very low-certainty evidence. A very small number of serious adverse effects were reported amongst the studies, providing reassurance exercise is safe for this population.

Exercise following breast cancer: exploratory survival analyses of two randomised, controlled trials

PURPOSE

The Exercise for Health trials were randomised, controlled trials designed to evaluate an 8-month pragmatic exercise intervention, commencing 6 weeks post-surgery for women with newly diagnosed breast cancer residing in urban or rural/regional Australia. For these exploratory analyses, the primary and secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), respectively.

METHODS

Consenting urban- (n = 194) and rural/regional-residing women (n = 143) were randomised to exercise (intervention delivered face-to-face or by telephone) or usual care. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for survival outcomes (exercise group, n = 207, 65% urban women; usual care group, n = 130, 46% urban women).

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 8.3 years, there were 11 (5.3%) deaths in the exercise group compared with 15 (11.5%) deaths in the usual care group (OS HR for the exercise group: 0.45, 95% CI 0.20-0.96; p = 0.04). DFS events for the exercise versus usual care group were 25 (12.1%) and 23 (17.7%), respectively (HR: 0.66, 95% CI 0.38-1.17; p = 0.16). HRs for OS favoured exercise irrespective of age, body mass index, stage of disease, intervention compliance, and physical activity levels at 12 months post-diagnosis, although were stronger (p < 0.05) for younger women, women with stage II + disease, women with 1 + comorbidity at time of diagnosis, higher intervention compliance and for those who met national physical activity guidelines at 12 months post-diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

An exercise intervention delivered during and beyond treatment for breast cancer, and that was designed to cater for all women irrespective of place of residence and access to health services, has clear potential to benefit survival. Trial numbers: ACT RN: 012606000233527; ACT RN: 12609000809235.

Recruitment to the "Breast-Activity and Healthy Eating After Diagnosis" (B-AHEAD) Randomized Controlled Trial

Excess weight at breast cancer diagnosis and weight gain during treatment are linked to increased breast cancer specific and all-cause mortality. The Breast—Activity and Healthy Eating After Diagnosis (B-AHEAD) trial tested 2 weight loss diet and exercise programmes versus a control receiving standard written advice during adjuvant treatment. This article identifies differences in characteristics between patients recruited from the main trial site to those of the whole population from that site during the recruitment period and identifies barriers to recruitment. A total of 409 patients with operable breast cancer were recruited within 12 weeks of surgery. We compared demographic and treatment factors between women recruited from the main trial coordinating site (n = 300) to the whole breast cancer population in the center (n = 532). Uptake at the coordinating site was 42%, comparable to treatment trials in the unit (47%). Women recruited were younger (55.9 vs 61.2 years, P < .001), more likely to live in least deprived postcode areas (41.7% vs 31.6%, P = .004), and more likely to have screen-detected cancers (55.3% vs 48.7%, P = .026) than the whole breast cancer population. The good uptake highlights the interest in lifestyle change around the time of diagnosis, a challenging time in the patient pathway, and shows that recruitment at this time is feasible. Barriers to uptake among older women and women with a lower socioeconomic status should be understood and overcome in order to improve recruitment to future lifestyle intervention programs.

Exercise for women receiving adjuvant therapy for breast cancer

BACKGROUND

A huge clinical research database on adjuvant cancer treatment has verified improvements in breast cancer outcomes such as recurrence and mortality rates. On the other hand, adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy with chemotherapy and radiotherapy impacts on quality of life due to substantial short- and long-term side effects. A number of studies have evaluated the effect of exercise interventions on those side effects. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in 2006. The original review identified some benefits of physical activity on physical fitness and the resulting capacity for performing activities of daily life. It also identified a lack of evidence for other outcomes, providing clear justification for an updated review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of aerobic or resistance exercise interventions during adjuvant treatment for breast cancer on treatment-related side effects such as physical deterioration, fatigue, diminished quality of life, depression, and cognitive dysfunction.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out an updated search in the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Specialised Register (30 March 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 2, 2015), MEDLINE (1966 to 30 March 2015), and EMBASE (1966 to 30 March 2015). We did not update the original searches in CINAHL (1982 to 2004), SPORTDiscus (1975 to 2004), PsycINFO (1872 to 2003), SIGLE (1880 to 2004), and ProQuest Digital Dissertations (1861 to 2004). We searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov for ongoing trials on 30 March 2015. We screened references in relevant reviews and published clinical trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that examined aerobic or resistance exercise or both in women undergoing adjuvant treatment for breast cancer. Published and unpublished trials were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed data extraction, assessed trials, and graded the methodological quality using Cochrane's 'Risk of bias' tool. Any disagreements were resolved through discussion or by consulting the third review author. We entered data into Review Manager for analysis. For outcomes assessed with a variety of instruments, we used the standardised mean difference (SMD) as a summary statistic for meta-analysis; for those assessed with the same instrument, we used the mean difference (MD).

MAIN RESULTS

For this 2015 update we included a total of 32 studies with 2626 randomised women, 8 studies from the original search and 24 studies from the updated search. We found evidence that physical exercise during adjuvant treatment for breast cancer probably improves physical fitness (SMD 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 0.59; 15 studies; 1310 women; moderate-quality evidence) and slightly reduces fatigue (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.16; 19 studies; 1698 women; moderate-quality evidence). Exercise may lead to little or no improvement in health-related quality of life (MD 1.10, 95% CI -5.28 to 7.48; 1 study; 68 women; low-quality evidence), a slight improvement in cancer site-specific quality of life (MD 4.24, 95% CI -1.81 to 10.29; 4 studies; 262 women; low-quality evidence), and an improvement in cognitive function (MD -11.55, 95% CI -22.06 to -1.05; 2 studies; 213 women; low-quality evidence). Exercise probably leads to little or no difference in cancer-specific quality of life (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.25; 12 studies; 1012 women; moderate-quality evidence) and little or no difference in depression (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.01; 5 studies; 674 women; moderate-quality evidence). Evidence for other outcomes ranged from low to moderate quality. Seven trials reported a very small number of adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Exercise during adjuvant treatment for breast cancer can be regarded as a supportive self care intervention that probably results in less fatigue, improved physical fitness, and little or no difference in cancer-specific quality of life and depression. Exercise may also slightly improve cancer site-specific quality of life and cognitive function, while it may result in little or no difference in health-related quality of life. This review is based on trials with a considerable degree of clinical heterogeneity regarding adjuvant cancer treatments and exercise interventions. Due to the difficulty of blinding exercise trials, all included trials were at high risk for performance bias. Furthermore, the majority of trials were at high risk for detection bias, largely due to most outcomes being self reported.The findings of the updated review have enabled us to make a more precise conclusion that both aerobic and resistance exercise can be regarded as beneficial for individuals with adjuvant therapy-related side effects. Further research is required to determine the optimal type, intensity, and timing of an exercise intervention. Furthermore, long-term evaluation is required due to possible long-term side effects of adjuvant treatment.

Cost-effectiveness of a pragmatic exercise intervention for women with breast cancer: results from a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To report on the cost-effectiveness of the Exercise for Health trial, comparing an exercise intervention with usual care during and following treatment for women with breast cancer.

METHODS

Women with breast cancer were randomized to an 8-month exercise intervention (involving regular contact with an exercise physiologist over the phone, n = 67, or home delivered face to face, n = 67) or usual care (n = 60) group and were assessed pre-intervention (5 weeks post-surgery), mid-intervention (6 months post-surgery), and 10 weeks post-intervention (12 months post-surgery). The benefit measures were "number of improvers" in quality of life (FACT-B+4) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Data on provider, patient, and government costs were used to consider 2 cost scenarios: (1) a service provider model and (2) a private model.

RESULTS

There were 69 improvers in the intervention group compared with 21 in the usual care group (odds ratio 2.09, 95% confidence interval 1.08, 4.01; P = .033). The incremental cost per improver was A$2282 to A$2644. Quality-adjusted life years gain for the intervention group versus the usual care group was 0.009, with incremental cost per QALY gain for models 1 and 2 being A$105 231 and A$90 842, respectively. However, sensitivity analyses indicate that incremental cost per QALY gained was volatile to EuroQol-5D-3L weights.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that a pragmatic exercise intervention yields more women with markedly improved quality of life after breast cancer than usual care and may be cost-effective. The results are less certain in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life years; however, this may be an inappropriate measure for reflecting exercise benefit for women with breast cancer.

The Functional Fitness MOT Test Battery for Older Adults: Protocol for a Mixed-Method Feasibility Study

Background

Increasing physical activity (PA) brings many health benefits, but engaging people in higher levels of PA after their 60s is not straightforward. The Functional Fitness MOT (FFMOT) is a new approach which aims to raise awareness about the importance of components of fitness (strength, balance, flexibility), highlight benefits of PA, engages older people in health behavior change discussions, and directs them to local activity resources. This battery of tests combined with a brief motivational interview has not been tested in terms of feasibility or effectiveness.

Objective

To assess whether the FFMOT, provided in a health care setting, is appealing to older patients of a community physiotherapy service and to understand the views and perceptions of the older people undergoing the FFMOT regarding the intervention, as well as the views of the physiotherapy staff delivering the intervention. Secondary aims are to assess the feasibility of carrying out a phase 2 pilot randomized controlled trial of the FFMOT, in the context of a community physiotherapy service, by establishing whether enough patients can be recruited and retained in the study, and enough outcome data can be generated.

Methods

A mixed-methods feasibility study will be conducted in two physiotherapy outpatient clinics in the United Kingdom. A total of 30 physically inactive, medically stable older adults over the age of 60 will be provided with an individual FFMOT, comprising a set of six standardized, validated, age-appropriate tests aimed at raising awareness of the different components of fitness. The results of these tests will be used to provide the participants with feedback on performance in comparison to sex and age-referenced norms. This will be followed by tailored advice on how to become more active and improve fitness, including advice on local opportunities to be more active. Subsequently, participants will be invited to attend a focus group to discuss barriers and motivators to being more active, health behavior change, and the scope for individuals to improve their PA levels. To inform the design of a future trial, descriptive (eg, recruitment and retention rates), quantitative (Community Healthy Activities Model Program for Seniors; CHAMPS physical activity questionnaire), and qualitative data (focus group discussions, semi-structured staff interviews) will be collected.

Results

Recruitment and enrolment for the trial started in September 2015. Follow-up will be completed in June 2016. Results are expected to be available at the end of 2016.

Discussion

Allied health professionals play a key role in encouraging older adults to increase their PA, but with little evidence on how best to do this within their clinical practice. The purpose of this feasibility study is to examine the introduction of a new service: The FFMOT. The views and perceptions of the older people undergoing the FFMOT and relating to its delivery in clinical practice will be explored. Data, which will inform the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial of effectiveness of the FFMOT in promoting improved PA, will be reported.

Trial Registration

International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): ISRCTN38950042; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN38950042

Healthy Living after Cancer: a dissemination and implementation study evaluating a telephone-delivered healthy lifestyle program for cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Given evidence shows physical activity, a healthful diet and weight management can improve cancer outcomes and reduce chronic disease risk, the major cancer organisations and health authorities have endorsed related guidelines for cancer survivors. Despite these, and a growing evidence base on effective lifestyle interventions, there is limited uptake into survivorship care.

METHODS/DESIGN

Healthy Living after Cancer (HLaC) is a national dissemination and implementation study that will evaluate the integration of an evidence-based lifestyle intervention for cancer survivors into an existing telephone cancer information and support service delivered by Australian state-based Cancer Councils. Eligible participants (adults having completed cancer treatment with curative intent) will receive 12 health coaching calls over 6 months from Cancer Council nurses/allied health professionals targeting national guidelines for physical activity, healthy eating and weight control. Using the RE-AIM evaluation framework, primary outcomes are service-level indicators of program reach, adoption, implementation/costs and maintenance, with secondary (effectiveness) outcomes of patient-reported anthropometric, behavioural and psychosocial variables collected at pre- and post-program completion. The total participant accrual target across four participating Cancer Councils is 900 over 3 years.

DISCUSSION

The national scope of the project and broad inclusion of cancer survivors, alongside evaluation of service-level indicators, associated costs and patient-reported outcomes, will provide the necessary practice-based evidence needed to inform future allocation of resources to support healthy living among cancer survivors.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR)--ACTRN12615000882527 (registered on 24/08/2015).

Practical clinical interventions for diet, physical activity, and weight control in cancer survivors

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE The importance of expanding cancer treatment to include the promotion of overall long-term health is emphasized in the Institute of Medicine report on delivering quality oncology care. Weight management, physical activity, and a healthy diet are key components of tertiary prevention but may be areas in which the oncologist and/or the oncology care team may be less familiar. This article reviews current diet and physical activity guidelines, the evidence supporting those recommendations, and provides an overview of practical interventions that have resulted in favorable improvements in lifestyle behavior change in cancer survivors. It also describes current lifestyle practices among cancer survivors and the role of the oncologist in helping cancer patients and survivors embark upon changes in lifestyle behaviors, and it calls for the development of partnerships between oncology providers, primary care providers, and experts in nutrition, exercise science, and behavior change to help positively orient cancer patients toward longer and healthier lives.

Physical activity and cancer survivorship

There has been an increase in the cancer survivor population in the United States over the past several decades primarily due to improvements in early detection of first malignancies and effective treatment modalities. A wealth of evidence has demonstrated that regular physical activity is associated with a lower risk of death, all-cause mortality, cancer recurrence, and several chronic diseases, including type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, common comorbid conditions in people who have survived cancer. Physical activity also is a central component of weight management.

METHODS

This review summarizes the current physical activity recommendations and the evidence linking physical activity to improvements in weight management, physiological effects, and psychological health outcomes for cancer survivors.

RESULTS

The available literature suggests physical activity is safe and is positively associated with weight management, cardiorespiratory fitness, muscular strength and endurance, quality of life, fatigue, and other psychosocial factors in cancer survivors. Yet relationships related to specific cancer diagnoses, treatments, and underlying cardiometabolic mechanisms associated with survival have not been thoroughly examined in randomized controlled trials. Furthermore, factors that influence adherence to physical activity behaviors must be identified to develop effective exercise programs. The use of objective measures of physical activity and the standardization of reporting outcome measures within intervention trials are needed to complement this effort.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare providers should consider individual differences among cancer survivors and tailor physical activity programs to meet the individual needs of the patient to assist in the adoption and maintenance of a physically active lifestyle.

Interventions for promoting habitual exercise in people living with and beyond cancer

BACKGROUND

The beneficial effects of regular exercise for people living with or beyond cancer are becoming apparent. However, how to promote exercise behaviour in sedentary cancer cohorts is not as well understood. A large majority of people living with or recovering from cancer do not meet exercise recommendations. Hence, reviewing the evidence on how to promote and sustain exercise behaviour is important.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions to promote exercise behaviour in sedentary people living with and beyond cancer and to address the following questions: Which interventions are most effective in improving aerobic fitness and skeletal muscle strength and endurance? What adverse effects are attributed to different exercise interventions? Which interventions are most effective in improving exercise behaviour amongst patients with different cancers? Which interventions are most likely to promote long-term (12 months or longer) exercise behaviour? What frequency of contact with exercise professionals is associated with increased exercise behaviour? What theoretical basis is most often associated with increased exercise behaviour? What behaviour change techniques are most often associated with increased exercise behaviour?

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 8, 2012), MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, PsycLIT/PsycINFO, SportDiscus and PEDro from inception to August 2012. We also searched the grey literature, wrote to leading experts in the field, wrote to charities and searched reference lists of other recent systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared an exercise intervention with a usual care approach in sedentary people over the age of 18 with a homogenous primary cancer diagnosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors working independently (LB and KH) screened all titles and abstracts to identify studies that might meet the inclusion criteria, or that cannot be safely excluded without assessment of the full text (e.g. when no abstract is available). All eligible papers were formally abstracted by at least two members of the review author team working independently (LB and KH) and using the data collection form. When possible, and if appropriate, we performed a fixed-effect meta-analysis of study outcomes. For continuous outcomes (e.g. cardiorespiratory fitness), we extracted the final value, the standard deviation of the outcome of interest and the number of participants assessed at follow-up in each treatment arm, to estimate standardised mean difference (SMD) between treatment arms. SMD was used, as investigators used heterogeneous methods to assess individual outcomes. If a meta-analysis was not possible or was not appropriate, we synthesised studies as a narrative.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen trials were included in this review, involving a total of 648 participants. Only studies involving breast, prostate or colorectal cancer were identified as eligible. Just six trials incorporated a target level of exercise that could meet current recommendations. Only three trials were identified that attempted to objectively validate independent exercise behaviour with accelerometers or heart rate monitoring. Adherence to exercise interventions, which is crucial for understanding treatment dose, is often poorly reported. It is important to note that the fundamental metrics of exercise behaviour (i.e. frequency, intensity and duration, repetitions, sets and intensity of resistance training), although easy to devise and report, are seldom included in published clinical trials.None of the included trials reported that 75% or greater adherence (the stated primary outcome for this review) of the intervention group met current aerobic exercise recommendations at any given follow-up. Just two trials reported six weeks of resistance exercise behaviour that would meet the guideline recommendations. However, three trials reported adherence of 75% or greater to an aerobic exercise goal that was less than the current guideline recommendation of 150 minutes per week. All three incorporated both supervised and independent exercise components as part of the intervention, and none placed restrictions on the control group in terms of exercise behaviour. These three trials shared programme set goals and the following behaviour change techniques: generalisation of a target behaviour; prompting of self-monitoring of behaviour; and prompting of practise. Despite the uncertainty surrounding adherence in many of the included trials, interventions caused improvements in aerobic exercise tolerance at 8 to 12 weeks (from 7 studies, SMD 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 0.95) in intervention participants compared with controls. At six months, aerobic exercise tolerance was also improved (from 5 studies, SMD 0.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.94), but it should be noted that four of the five trials used in this analysis had a high risk of bias, hence caution is warranted in interpretation of results. Attrition over the course of these interventions is typically low (median 6%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to promote exercise in cancer survivors who report better levels of adherence share some common behaviour change techniques. These involve setting programme goals, prompting practise and self-monitoring and encouraging participants to attempt to generalise behaviours learned in supervised exercise environments to other, non-supervised contexts. However, expecting most sedentary survivors to achieve current guideline recommendations of at least 150 minutes per week of aerobic exercise is likely to be unrealistic. As with all well-designed exercise programmes in any context, prescriptions should be designed around individual capabilities, and frequency, duration and intensity or sets, repetitions, intensity or resistance training should be generated on this basis.

Telehealth system (e-CUIDATE) to improve quality of life in breast cancer survivors: rationale and study protocol for a randomized clinical trial

Background

Breast cancer survivors suffer physical impairment after oncology treatment. This impairment reduces quality of life (QoL) and increase the prevalence of handicaps associated to unhealthy lifestyle (for example, decreased aerobic capacity and strength, weight gain, and fatigue). Recent work has shown that exercise adapted to individual characteristics of patients is related to improved overall and disease-free survival. Nowadays, technological support using telerehabilitation systems is a promising strategy with great advantage of a quick and efficient contact with the health professional. It is not known the role of telerehabilitation through therapeutic exercise as a support tool to implement an active lifestyle which has been shown as an effective resource to improve fitness and reduce musculoskeletal disorders of these women.

Methods / Design

This study will use a two-arm, assessor blinded, parallel randomized controlled trial design. People will be eligible if: their diagnosis is of stages I, II, or IIIA breast cancer; they are without chronic disease or orthopedic issues that would interfere with ability to participate in a physical activity program; they had access to the Internet and basic knowledge of computer use or living with a relative who has this knowledge; they had completed adjuvant therapy except for hormone therapy and not have a history of cancer recurrence; and they have an interest in improving lifestyle. Participants will be randomized into e-CUIDATE or usual care groups. E-CUIDATE give participants access to a range of contents: planning exercise arranged in series with breathing exercises, mobility, strength, and stretching. All of these exercises will be assigned to women in the telerehabilitation group according to perceived needs. The control group will be asked to maintain their usual routine. Study endpoints will be assessed after 8 weeks (immediate effects) and after 6 months. The primary outcome will be QoL measured by The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 version 3.0 and breast module called The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Breast Cancer-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire. The secondary outcomes: pain (algometry, Visual Analogue Scale, Brief Pain Inventory short form); body composition; physical measurement (abdominal test, handgrip strength, back muscle strength, and multiple sit-to-stand test); cardiorespiratory fitness (International Fitness Scale, 6-minute walk test, International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form); fatigue (Piper Fatigue Scale and Borg Fatigue Scale); anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale); cognitive function (Trail Making Test and Auditory Consonant Trigram); accelerometry; lymphedema; and anthropometric perimeters.

Discussion

This study investigates the feasibility and effectiveness of a telerehabilitation system during adjuvant treatment of patients with breast cancer. If this treatment option is effective, telehealth systems could offer a choice of supportive care to cancer patients during the survivorship phase.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01801527

Long-term physical activity trends in breast cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Physical activity is associated with reduced mortality and higher quality of life in breast cancer survivors; however, limited data on the prevalence of activity and long-term trends after diagnosis are available.

METHODS

A multiethnic cohort of 631 women (18-64 years) with stage 0 to IIIA breast cancer was followed for 10 years. Recreational aerobic activity (MET-h/wk) was ascertained for the year before diagnosis (baseline), 24 months, 5 years, and 10 years after enrollment. Women were classified according to U.S. physical activity guidelines (≥150 min/wk moderate or ≥75 min/wk vigorous activity). The OR for meeting guidelines at 5 and 10 years according to baseline factors was estimated using logistic regression. The change in MET-h/wk was predicted using linear regression.

RESULTS

Prediagnosis, 34% of women met physical activity guidelines; 34.0%, 39.5%, and 21.4% met guidelines at 24 months, 5 years, and 10 years after enrollment, respectively. Less than 8% of survivors met guidelines at all follow-up periods. Over 10 years, recreational aerobic activity decreased by a mean ± SD of 4.3 ± 16.2 MET-h/wk. Meeting guidelines pre-diagnosis was strongly associated with meeting guidelines at 5 years [OR (95% confidence interval; CI): 2.76 (1.85-4.1)] and 10 years [OR (95% CI): 3.35 (2.13-5.28)]. No other demographic or prognostic factors were significantly associated with the 10-year change in MET-h/wk.

CONCLUSION

The vast majority of early breast cancer survivors do not meet national exercise recommendations 10 years postdiagnosis.

IMPACT

Physical activity levels are low in breast cancer survivors across the 10 years postdiagnosis; nonetheless, the predictors of activity in this population remain poorly understood.

Exercise for health: a randomized, controlled trial evaluating the impact of a pragmatic, translational exercise intervention on the quality of life, function and treatment-related side effects following breast cancer

Exercise for Health was a randomized, controlled trial designed to evaluate two modes of delivering (face-to-face [FtF] and over-the-telephone [Tel]) an 8-month translational exercise intervention, commencing 6-weeks post-breast cancer surgery (PS). Outcomes included quality of life (QoL), function (fitness and upper body) and treatment-related side effects (fatigue, lymphoedema, body mass index, menopausal symptoms, anxiety, depression and pain). Generalised estimating equation modelling determined time (baseline [5 weeks PS], mid-intervention [6 months PS], post-intervention [12 months PS]), group (FtF, Tel, Usual Care [UC]) and time-by-group effects. 194 women representative of the breast cancer population were randomised to the FtF (n = 67), Tel (n = 67) and UC (n = 60) groups. There were significant (p < 0.05) interaction effects on QoL, fitness and fatigue with differences being observed between the treatment groups and the UC group. Trends observed for the treatment groups were similar. The treatment groups reported improved QoL, fitness and fatigue over time and changes observed between baseline and post-intervention were clinically relevant. In contrast, the UC group experienced no change, or worsening QoL, fitness and fatigue, mid-intervention. Although improvements in the UC group occurred by 12-months post-surgery, the change did not meet the clinically relevant threshold. There were no differences in other treatment-related side effects between groups. This translational intervention trial, delivered either FtF or Tel, supports exercise as a form of adjuvant breast cancer therapy that can prevent declines in fitness and function during treatment and optimise recovery post-treatment.

Exercise interventions on health-related quality of life for cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Cancer survivors experience numerous disease and treatment-related adverse outcomes and poorer health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Exercise interventions are hypothesized to alleviate these adverse outcomes. HRQoL and its domains are important measures for cancer survivorship.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of exercise on overall HRQoL and HRQoL domains among adult post-treatment cancer survivors.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PEDRO, LILACS, SIGLE, SportDiscus, OTSeeker, and Sociological Abstracts from inception to October 2011 with no language or date restrictions. We also searched citations through Web of Science and Scopus, PubMed's related article feature, and several websites. We reviewed reference lists of included trials and other reviews in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing exercise interventions with usual care or other nonexercise intervention to assess overall HRQoL or at least one HRQoL domain in adults. Included trials tested exercise interventions that were initiated after completion of active cancer treatment. We excluded trials including people who were terminally ill, or receiving hospice care, or both, and where the majority of trial participants were undergoing active treatment for either the primary or recurrent cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Five paired review authors independently extracted information on characteristics of included trials, data on effects of the intervention, and assessed risk of bias based on predefined criteria. Where possible, meta-analyses results were performed for HRQoL and HRQoL domains for the reported difference between baseline values and follow-up values using standardized mean differences (SMD) and a random-effects model by length of follow-up. We also reported the SMDs between mean follow-up values of exercise and control group. Because investigators used many different HRQoL and HRQoL domain instruments and often more than one for the same domain, we selected the more commonly used instrument to include in the SMD meta-analyses. We also report the mean difference for each type of instrument separately.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 40 trials with 3694 participants randomized to an exercise (n = 1927) or comparison (n = 1764) group. Cancer diagnoses in study participants included breast, colorectal, head and neck, lymphoma, and other. Thirty trials were conducted among participants who had completed active treatment for their primary or recurrent cancer and 10 trials included participants both during and post cancer treatment. Mode of the exercise intervention included strength training, resistance training, walking, cycling, yoga, Qigong, or Tai Chi. HRQoL and its domains were measured using a wide range of measures.The results suggested that exercise compared with control has a positive impact on HRQoL and certain HRQoL domains. Exercise resulted in improvement in: global HRQoL at 12 weeks' (SMD 0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16 to 0.81) and 6 months' (0.46; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.84) follow-up, breast cancer concerns between 12 weeks' and 6 months' follow-up (SMD 0.99; 95% CI 0.41 to 1.57), body image/self-esteem when assessed using the Rosenberg Self-Esteem scale at 12 weeks (MD 4.50; 95% CI 3.40 to 5.60) and between 12 weeks' and 6 months' (mean difference (MD) 2.70; 95% CI 0.73 to 4.67) follow-up, emotional well-being at 12 weeks' follow-up (SMD 0.33; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.61), sexuality at 6 months' follow-up (SMD 0.40; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.68), sleep disturbance when comparing follow-up values by comparison group at 12 weeks' follow-up (SMD -0.46; 95% CI -0.72 to -0.20), and social functioning at 12 weeks' (SMD 0.45; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.87) and 6 months' (SMD 0.49; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.87) follow-up. Further, exercise interventions resulted in decreased anxiety at 12 weeks' follow-up (SMD -0.26; 95% CI -0.07 to -0.44), fatigue at 12 weeks' (SMD -0.82; 95% CI -1.50 to -0.14) and between 12 weeks' and 6 months' (SMD -0.42; 95% CI -0.02 to -0.83) follow-up, and pain at 12 weeks' follow-up (SMD -0.29; 95% CI -0.55 to -0.04) when comparing follow-up values by comparison group.Positive trends and impact of exercise intervention existed for depression and body image (when analyzing combined instruments); however, because few studies measured these outcomes the robustness of findings is uncertain.No conclusions can be drawn regarding the effects of exercise interventions on HRQoL domains of cognitive function, physical functioning, general health perspective, role function, and spirituality.Results of the review need to be interpreted cautiously owing to the risk of bias. All the trials reviewed were at high risk for performance bias. In addition, the majority of trials were at high risk for detection, attrition, and selection bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review indicates that exercise may have beneficial effects on HRQoL and certain HRQoL domains including cancer-specific concerns (e.g. breast cancer), body image/self-esteem, emotional well-being, sexuality, sleep disturbance, social functioning, anxiety, fatigue, and pain at varying follow-up periods. The positive results must be interpreted cautiously due to the heterogeneity of exercise programs tested and measures used to assess HRQoL and HRQoL domains, and the risk of bias in many trials. Further research is required to investigate how to sustain positive effects of exercise over time and to determine essential attributes of exercise (mode, intensity, frequency, duration, timing) by cancer type and cancer treatment for optimal effects on HRQoL and its domains.

Exercise interventions on health-related quality of life for people with cancer during active treatment

BACKGROUND

People with cancer undergoing active treatment experience numerous disease- and treatment-related adverse outcomes and poorer health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Exercise interventions are hypothesized to alleviate these adverse outcomes. HRQoL and its domains are important measures of cancer survivorship, both during and after the end of active treatment for cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of exercise on overall HRQoL outcomes and specific HRQoL domains among adults with cancer during active treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PEDRO, LILACS, SIGLE, SportDiscus, OTSeeker, Sociological Abstracts from inception to November 2011 with no language or date restrictions. We also searched citations through Web of Science and Scopus, PubMed's related article feature, and several websites. We reviewed reference lists of included trials and other reviews in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing exercise interventions with usual care or other type of non-exercise comparison intervention to maintain or enhance, or both, overall HRQoL or at least one distinct domain of HRQoL. Included trials tested exercise interventions that were initiated when adults with cancer were undergoing active cancer treatment or were scheduled to initiate treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Five paired review authors independently extracted information on characteristics of included trials, data on effects of the intervention, and assessed risk of bias based on predefined criteria. Where possible, we performed meta-analyses for HRQoL and HRQoL domains for the reported difference between baseline values and follow-up values using standardized mean differences (SMDs) and a random-effects model by length of follow-up. We also reported the SMD at follow-up between the exercise and control groups. Because investigators used many different HRQoL and HRQoL domain instruments and often more than one for the same domain, we selected the more commonly used instrument to include in the SMD meta-analyses. We also report the mean difference for each type of instrument separately.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 56 trials with 4826 participants randomized to an exercise (n = 2286) or comparison (n = 1985) group. Cancer diagnoses in trial participants included breast, prostate, gynecologic, hematologic, and other. Thirty-six trials were conducted among participants who were currently undergoing active treatment for their cancer, 10 trials were conducted among participants both during and post active cancer treatment, and the remaining 10 trials were conducted among participants scheduled for active cancer treatment. Mode of exercise intervention differed across trials and included walking by itself or in combination with cycling, resistance training, or strength training; resistance training; strength training; cycling; yoga; or Qigong. HRQoL and its domains were assessed using a wide range of measures.The results suggest that exercise interventions compared with control interventions have a positive impact on overall HRQoL and certain HRQoL domains. Exercise interventions resulted in improvements in: HRQoL from baseline to 12 weeks' follow-up (SMD 0.33; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.55) or when comparing difference in follow-up scores at 12 weeks (SMD 0.47; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.79); physical functioning from baseline to 12 weeks' follow-up (SMD 0.69; 95% CI 0.16 to 1.22) or 6 months (SMD 0.28; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.55); or when comparing differences in follow-up scores at 12 weeks (SMD 0.28; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.45) or 6 months (SMD 0.29; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.50); role function from baseline to 12 weeks' follow-up (SMD 0.48; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.90) or when comparing differences in follow-up scores at 12 weeks (SMD 0.17; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.34) or 6 months (SMD 0.32; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.61); and, in social functioning at 12 weeks' follow-up (SMD 0.54; 95% CI 0.03 to 1.05) or when comparing differences in follow-up scores at both 12 weeks (SMD 0.16; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.27) and 6 months (SMD 0.24; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.44). Further, exercise interventions resulted in a decrease in fatigue from baseline to 12 weeks' follow-up (SMD -0.38; 95% CI -0.57 to -0.18) or when comparing difference in follow-up scores at follow-up of 12 weeks (SMD -0.73; 95% CI -1.14 to -0.31). Since there is consistency of findings on both types of measures (change scores and difference in follow-up scores) there is greater confidence in the robustness of these findings.When examining exercise effects by subgroups, exercise interventions had significantly greater reduction in anxiety for survivors with breast cancer than those with other types of cancer. Further, there was greater reduction in depression, fatigue, and sleep disturbances, and improvement in HRQoL, emotional wellbeing (EWB), physical functioning, and role function for cancer survivors diagnosed with cancers other than breast cancer but not for breast cancer. There were also greater improvements in HRQoL and physical functioning, and reduction in anxiety, fatigue, and sleep disturbances when prescribed a moderate or vigorous versus a mild exercise program.Results of the review need to be interpreted cautiously owing to the risk of bias. All the trials reviewed were at high risk for performance bias. In addition, the majority of trials were at high risk for detection, attrition, and selection bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review indicates that exercise may have beneficial effects at varying follow-up periods on HRQoL and certain HRQoL domains including physical functioning, role function, social functioning, and fatigue. Positive effects of exercise interventions are more pronounced with moderate- or vigorous-intensity versus mild-intensity exercise programs. The positive results must be interpreted cautiously because of the heterogeneity of exercise programs tested and measures used to assess HRQoL and HRQoL domains, and the risk of bias in many trials. Further research is required to investigate how to sustain positive effects of exercise over time and to determine essential attributes of exercise (mode, intensity, frequency, duration, timing) by cancer type and cancer treatment for optimal effects on HRQoL and its domains.