Effects of weight-lifting or resistance exercise on breast cancer-related lymphedema: A systematic review

Preventive effects of progressive resistance training of different intensities on breast cancer-related lymphedema

PURPOSE

Explore the preventive effects of varying intensity progressive resistance exercise on breast cancer-related lymphedema.

METHODS

A total of 114 breast cancer patients who underwent axillary lymph node dissection at Tangshan People's Hospital from January to April 2024 were included. Participants were randomly assigned to three groups: the control group received conventional care; intervention group 1 received conventional care + low-intensity progressive resistance exercise; and intervention group 2 received routine nursing + moderate and high-intensity progressive resistance exercise. Body composition and grip strength were assessed pre-intervention, post-intervention, and at 3 and 6 months follow-up to compare differences among the groups.

RESULTS

(1) Body composition: At post-intervention, 3 and 6 months follow-up, segmental water differences and extracellular water ratios, along with 1- and 5-kHz SFBIA in both intervention groups, were lower than in the control group. Intervention group 2 had a lower extracellular water ratio than group 1 at post-intervention, and at 3 months follow-up, group 2 showed lower water differences and extracellular water ratios than group 1, with slight variations at 6 months (P < 0.001). (2) Grip strength: At post-intervention, 3 months and 6 months follow-up, grip strength in intervention group 1 and intervention group 2 was higher than that in control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Resistance exercise enhances muscle strength and prevents lymphedema, with moderate-high-intensity exercise proving more effective than low intensity. Adverse events were minimal, suggesting that increasing resistance exercise intensity, while considering participants' conditions, may yield better preventive outcomes.

Online-delivered resistance exercise intervention among racially diverse breast cancer survivors: Feasibility, acceptability, and exploratory outcomes of B-REP

PURPOSE

The aims are to determine the feasibility of an online-delivered resistance exercise program among racially diverse breast cancer survivors and to conduct an exploratory analysis of the intervention on muscular strength, physical activity levels, health-related quality of life, and self-efficacy.

METHODS

A 2-arm randomized controlled trial study design with assessments at pre- and post-intervention was used. Participants (n = 52) were recruited from clinics at the host institution and randomized to either intervention (n = 28) or minimal contact control (MCC) conditions (n = 24). All participants received a 12-week individualized resistance exercise prescription based on their baseline functional strength assessment. Intervention participants exercised one-on-one once per week over Zoom with an exercise trainer. MCC participants received no supervision. Descriptive statistics were used to determine feasibility and acceptability (primary outcomes). Repeated measures ANOVAs were used to examine exploratory outcomes.

RESULTS

The intervention demonstrated high rates for feasibility outcomes of enrollment (80.0%) and post-intervention assessment completion (92.9%). Acceptability outcomes were high for session attendance (98.0%) and satisfaction (Mscore = 4.87 out of 5, SD = .18). The intervention group increased upper- (p < .01) and lower- (p < .02) body strength compared to MCC condition.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention was feasible, acceptable, and demonstrated increases in muscular strength. Limitations include a small sample recruited from one cancer center. Future research is needed to determine longitudinal impacts of resistance exercise on survivorship outcomes. Online-delivered resistance exercise shows promising efficacy among racially diverse breast cancer survivors.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov registration: NCT04562233 on September 18, 2020.

YouTube as a source of information on breast cancer-related lymphedema exercises: A content, quality, and reliability analysis

This descriptive study aimed to determine the content, quality, and reliability of YouTube videos on breast cancer-related lymphedema exercises. A total of 127 videos were independently assessed, with 103 of them categorized as either informative or misleading content groups. The content (mean score: 4.07 ± 2.29) and quality (mean score: 3.15 ± 1.46) of videos concerning lymphedema exercises were moderate, while reliability (mean score: 2.27 ± 1.64) was low. Among the 103 videos categorized using the content checklist, Global Quality Scale, and DISCERN reliability instrument, 57.3% (n = 59) were informative, and 42.7% (n = 44) had misleading information. The mean scores of the content, quality, and reliability of the informative content videos were substantially higher than the misleading content videos, and of videos uploaded by universities/professional organizations/health care professionals/medical advertisements were higher than the videos uploaded by other sources. Through this study, the researchers have unveiled that the content and quality levels of YouTube videos in lymphedema exercises were moderate, and the reliability level was low.

Effects of combined exercises on shoulder mobility and strength of the upper extremities in breast cancer rehabilitation: a 3-week randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to analyze the effects of mobility training with FIVE® devices in combination with device-supported strength exercises for shoulder mobility and strength of the upper extremities in women with breast cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a pretest-posttest intervention study with female breast cancer patients (n = 41) who were randomly assigned to two groups by lot during their stationary follow-up treatment at a rehabilitation clinic in the south of Germany between February and March 2020. As part of exercise therapy, the intervention group (n = 24) performed a mobility training with FIVE® devices combined with device-supported strength training, whereas the control group (n = 17) completed device-supported strength training. Before and after the 3-week intervention (3 training sessions/week), shoulder mobility and isokinetic maximal strength were tested.

RESULTS

Both groups achieved significant improvements in shoulder mobility in the frontal and sagittal plane (between 3.8 and 15.35%; p < 0.05) and in strength performance (31.36% [IG] vs. 51.24% [CG]; p < 0.001). However, no robust evidence could be determined about potential interaction effects.

CONCLUSION

A combined device-supported strength and mobility training (FIVE®) showed no advantages. Therefore, a variety of exercise methods is possible in exercise therapy of breast cancer patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Since the University of Education Weingarten does not assign clinical trial registration numbers or ethical approval numbers, none could be assigned for this study.

Analysis of the Understanding and Worry about Lymphedema of Patients with Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Lymphedema is a potential lifelong sequela of breast cancer treatment. We sought to: (1) evaluate the worry and knowledge of patients about lymphedema, (2) quantify patients reporting lymphedema education and screening, and (3) determine willingness to participate in lymphedema screening and prevention programs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A survey evaluating lymphedema-related knowledge and worry was sent to patients treated for stage 0-III breast cancer. Exclusion criteria included > 10 years since diagnosis, missing clinical staging, and those without axillary surgery. Responses were linked with clinicopathologic information.

RESULTS

Of 141 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 89% of those without lymphedema were not at all or slightly worried about lymphedema. Higher levels of worry were associated with clinical stage II-III disease [odds ratio (OR) 2.63, p = 0.03], a history of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) (OR 4.58, p < 0.01), and employment (OR 2.21, p = 0.05). A total of 102 (72%) patients recalled receiving lymphedema education. Lymphedema knowledge was limited, with < 25% of respondents answering > 50% of the risk factor questions correctly. Worry and knowledge were not significantly associated. Of patients without lymphedema, 36% were interested in learning more about lymphedema and 64% were willing to participate in or learn more about a screening program. Most (66%) felt that lymphedema information should be provided before and after cancer treatment.

DISCUSSION

A majority of our breast cancer survivors had limited knowledge about lymphedema risk factors. While most patients were not worried about developing lymphedema, higher worry was seen in patients with a higher clinical stage at diagnosis, ALND, and employment. Our findings suggest potential targets and timing for patient-centered educational interventions.

Breast cancer-related lymphoedema and resistance exercise: An evidence-based review of guidelines, consensus statements and systematic reviews

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Breast cancer-related lymphoedema (BCRL) is a side effect of cancer treatment and can be alleviated by resistance exercise. This systematic, evidence-based review examined the existing best evidence on resistance exercise for BCRL to accurately describe the current status of the field and offer recommendations for clinicians.

METHODS

This review adheres to the PRISMA guidelines. Clinical practice guidelines, consensus documents, systematic reviews and other related evidence-based resources about resistance exercise for BCRL were retrieved through the English databases and guideline websites. The publication data limit was set to December 2020. The following search terms were used: 'breast cancer/breast neoplasm/breast carcinoma/breast tumor/breast malignancy, lymphedema/swelling/edema/lymphoedema, resistance/weight/strength training, best practice/clinical practice/guideline/consensus documents'. The quality of the included studies was evaluated by two authors independently using AGREE II and AMSTAR II tools. Evidence-based recommendations on resistance exercise relevant for BCRL were synthesised and categorised.

RESULTS

Twenty two articles (seven guidelines, four consensus documents and eleven systematic reviews) were included. The overall quality of the eleven eligible guidelines and consensus documents was moderate to high according to the AGREE II criteria. The quality of the eleven systematic reviews was critically low to high according to the AMSTAR criteria. Six clinical topics involving 43 recommendations were identified. Recommendations were categorised by safety of resistance training, effectiveness of resistance training, evaluation prior to resistance exercise, resistance exercise prescription, resistance training outcome index and points for attention.

CONCLUSIONS

This study summarises 43 recommendations for resistance training for BCRL and provides guidance for clinicians. Based on randomised trials and systematic reviews published in recent years, there is an urgent need to update the guidelines and consensus documents in terms of topics, for example effectiveness of resistance training and resistance training outcome index.

Impact of Inertial Training on Muscle Strength and Quality of Life in Breast Cancer Survivors

The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of inertial training on the muscle strength, on breast-cancer-related lymphedema, and on quality of life in breast cancer survivors. After a mastectomy, 24 women (age, 66.2 ± 10.6 years) were randomized to a training (n = 12) or control group (n = 12). The training group performed inertial training twice per week for 6 weeks with a training load of about 70% of the maximal force. Before and after training, we tested the maximum force of shoulder flexors, extensors, abductors, and adductors; body composition; breast-cancer-related lymphedema; and disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand. Inertial training significantly improved the strength in all tested muscles (from 32 to 68%; effect size (ES) from 0.89 to 1.85 in the impaired limb and from 31 to 64%; ES from 0.86 to 1.57 in the unimpaired limb). However, changes in the control group were not significant. Quality of life improved following treatment; the disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand score decreased significantly by 24.5% (ES from—0.29 to 1.38), p ≤ 0.05 in the training group and by 3.99% (ES from −0.49 to 1.14) in the control group p > 0.05. Breast-cancer-related lymphedema and body composition did not change significantly after the intervention in either group. We recommend inertial training for increasing muscle strength and improving quality of life in breast cancer survivors.

Resistance Exercise for Breast Cancer Patients? Evidence from the Last Decade

Background

Breast cancer is associated with many therapy-induced side effects that impact patients' lives from diagnosis to long-term survivorship. Physical activity has become an important and proven supportive measure in treating side effects like loss of muscle strength, fatigue, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, lymphedema, and loss of quality of life. Resistance training (RT) is an established exercise intervention for breast cancer patients, but the correct type, timing, intensity, and duration of exercise remain unclear. It is necessary to investigate different resistance training interventions and their effects on breast cancer patients by covering all stages of treatment, beginning with prehabilitation, through the period of acute therapy, to long-term survivorship.

Conclusion

Upon evaluation of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the past decade, RT was found to be feasible and safe. Furthermore, there is evidence on the impact of RT on muscle strength, CRF and QoL amongst other factors. Studies implementing mixes of aerobic and strength exercises are rather common, but RCTs of RT-only protocols remain scarce. Different strength training protocols at distinct stages of breast cancer treatment have been conducted, but with the complexity of treatments and the variety of training styles, a large field of study remains.

Key Messages

Although the overall data on RT for breast cancer patients has increased, there are many different methodological approaches and testing measures as well as gaps in study documentation. There is still very little of the evidence that would facilitate the compilation of standardized and individualized guidelines.

The Effect of Resistance Training on Body Composition During and After Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Changes in body composition during cancer treatments have been linked with poorer outcomes, and increased morbidity and mortality. The effect of resistance training (RT) on body composition in cancer cohorts is debated.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effect of RT on body composition during and after treatment.

METHODS

We searched five electronic databases for articles up to 1 February 2021 and included randomized controlled trials that compared RT with a non-exercise control in adults with cancer. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool. Pairwise, random-effects meta-analysis was used to synthesize the available data.

RESULTS

Overall, we included 15 studies (n = 1368). After treatment (11 studies), RT increased lean mass with moderate heterogeneity {0.41 kg [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05, 0.76], p = 0.029; I² = 47.1%, p = 0.02} and decreased fat mass with substantial heterogeneity (- 0.59 kg [95% CI - 1.05, - 0.12], p = 0.019; I² = 69.1%, p < 0.001). During treatment (4 studies), RT did not increase lean mass (0.71 kg [95% CI - 0.04, 1.45], p = 0.05; I² = 0.0%, p = 0.75) or reduce fat mass (0.00 kg [95% CI - 5.31, 5.30], p = 0.99; I² = 0.0%, p = 0.62), both with no heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

Modest improvements in body composition were observed following RT after cancer treatment; however, no changes were observed during treatment. These adaptations are markedly lower than those observed in healthy cohorts but may be clinically meaningful for the cancer survivorship population. At present it is unclear if these diminished adaptations are due to ineffective exercise prescriptions in cancer cohorts or due to an innate anabolic resistance as a result of cancer and its treatments.

STUDY REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework (osf.io/x6z72).

Is it safe to exercise during oncological treatment? A study of adverse events during endurance and resistance training - data from the Phys-Can study

INTRODUCTION

Few studies have systematically evaluated the risk of adverse events (AEs) among persons exercising during oncological treatment. We aimed to describe incidence and types of AEs during exercise for persons undergoing oncological treatment, and associations to exercise intensity, exercise adherence, chemotherapy treatment, initial aerobic fitness. A second aim was to compare incidence of lymphedema, periphery inserted central catheter (PICC) complications, and other new medical conditions (any illness or injury occurred during the exercise trial) between high-intensity vs low-to-moderate exercise and usual care (UC).

METHODS

This descriptive, comparative study was based on data from an observational study including patients in an UC setting (n = 90) and a randomized exercise trial (n = 577) in which participants exercised at high-intensity (HI) or low-moderate intensity (LMI). Persons with breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer undergoing neo/adjuvant treatment were included. AEs were reported by exercise coaches, participants, and identified in medical records, as were lymphedema, PICC-complications, and new medical conditions.

RESULTS

Coaches reported AEs for 20% of the participants, while 28% of participants self-reported AEs. The most common coach- and participant reported AEs were musculoskeletal and the majority (97%) were considered minor. HI had higher likelihood of AEs than LMI, according to both coaches (OR: 1.9 [95%CI 1.16-3.21], p=.011) and participants (OR: 3.36 [95%CI 2.00-5.62], ≤.001). Lymphedema rates were low (4-9%) and PICC complications ranged from 15% in LMI to 23% in UC and there were no statistically significant differences between HI, LMI, and UC. There were no statistically significant differences between HI and LMI regarding new medical conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Exercise during treatment is safe for these patient groups in this setting, even HI exercise can be recommended if no medical contraindications are present. Similar to healthy populations, a higher risk of having minor AEs when exercising at HI in comparison to LMI may exist.

Incidence and risk factors for lower limb lymphedema associated with endometrial cancer: Results from a prospective, longitudinal cohort study

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the incidence and risk factors for lower limb lymphedema (LLL) associated with endometrial cancer is limited. Our objective was to use data from a prospective, longitudinal gynecological cancer cohort study to determine LLL incidence up to 24 months post-diagnosis of endometrial cancer and to explore the relationship between personal and treatment-related factors and risk of developing LLL.

METHODS

Women recently diagnosed with endometrial cancer (n = 235) were evaluated at regular intervals post-diagnosis (up to 3-monthly) using bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) and self-reported leg swelling (SRLS).

RESULTS

Incidence of LLL at 24 months post-diagnosis was 33% and 45% according to BIS and SRLS, respectively. When analyses were restricted to obese women, incidence at 24 months post-diagnosis increased to 67% (BIS) and 54% (SRLS). Following adjusted analyses, higher body mass index was associated with higher odds of baseline lymphedema (BIS: OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.47-2.49, p < .01; SRLS: OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00-1.12, p < .01) and LLL incidence by 24 months post-diagnosis (BIS: OR 1.29, 95% CI: 0.99-1.68, p = .055; SRLS: OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.11, p = .008). According to SRLS, presence of comorbidities was also associated with baseline lymphedema (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.15-1.78, p = .001), and more extensive lymph node dissection (OR 1.06, 95% CI: 1.01-1.12, p = .026) and receipt of chemotherapy (OR: 2.65, 95% CI: 1.12-6.29, p = .027) were identified as risk factors for lymphedema incidence.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that LLL following endometrial cancer is common, particularly in women with high body mass index, or comorbidities, and those requiring more extensive lymph node dissection or chemotherapy. Future studies should examine the potential of weight loss intervention as a strategy to reduce LLL incidence.

A Longitudinal Study of a Multicomponent Exercise Intervention with Remote Guidance among Breast Cancer Patients

Purpose: Breast cancer patients in treatment suffer from long-term side effects that seriously influence their physical and mental health. The aim of this study was to examine effectiveness of a 12-week multicomponent exercise (ME) with remote guidance intervention on health-related outcomes after one year among breast cancer patients. Methods: In phases I–III, 60 patients (51.2 ± 7.9 years) with breast cancer (BC) who completed chemotherapy/postoperative radiotherapy within the previous four months to two years were randomly assigned to (1) multicomponent exercise with remote guidance (ME) and (2) usual care (UC). Eligible participants were approached to assess cancer-related quality of life (QOL), muscle strength, cardiorespiratory endurance, and physical activity (PA) barriers after one year. Results: The results demonstrated that, after one year, the ME group reported higher vitality-related QOL (5.776, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.987, 10.565, effect size [ES] = 0.360), mental health-related QOL (9.938, 95% CI 4.146, 15.729, ES = 0.512), leg strength and endurance (2.880, CI 1.337, 4.423, ES = 0.557), and strength and endurance of upper extremities (2.745, 95% CI 1.076, 4.415, ES = 0.491) and lower physical activity (PA) hindrance (5.120, 95% CI 1.976, 8.264, ES = 0.486) than the UC group. Conclusions: The ME group observed significant differences from the UC group in QOL, muscle strength, cardiopulmonary endurance, and PA participation. These findings suggested that the multicomponent exercise intervention with remote guidance produced long-term health benefits for breast cancer patients.

A scoring system for predicting the risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema

Objective

We aimed to establish a scoring system to predict the risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema.

Methods

From April 2017 to December 2018, 533 patients who previously underwent surgery for breast cancer were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Univariate analysis was performed to explore and define the risk factors. A scoring system was then established on the basis of odds ratio values in the regression analysis.

Results

The additive scoring system values ranged from 6 to 22. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of this scoring system showed a sensitivity and specificity of 83.3% and 57.3%, respectively, to predict the risk of lymphedema at a cut-off of 15.5 points; the area under the curve was 0.736 (95% confidence interval: 0.662–0.811), with χ² = 5.134 (P = 0.274) for the Hosmer–Lemeshow test.

Conclusions

The predictive efficiency and accuracy of the scoring system were acceptable, and the system could be used to predict and screen groups at high risk for breast cancer-related lymphedema.