Effect of Exercise Adjunct to Radiation and Androgen Deprivation Therapy on Patient-Reported Treatment Toxicity in Men With Prostate Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of 2 Randomized Controlled Trials

Exercise Training Benefits Health-Related Quality of Life and Functional Capacity during Breast Cancer Chemotherapy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

To examine the effectiveness of a supervised exercise training program (SETP) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and functional capacity in women with breast cancer (BC) undergoing chemotherapy.

METHODS

Ninety-three women with early-stage BC were randomly allocated to a SETP plus usual care (exercise, n = 47) or usual care alone (UC, n = 46). The SETP included three sessions per week, combining aerobic and resistance training, conducted concurrently over the chemotherapy. The EORTC Cancer Quality-of-Life-Questionnaire-Core-30 (QLQ-C30) and the BC-specific module (QLQ-BR23) were used to assess HRQoL. Functional capacity was analyzed by maximum voluntary handgrip strength (MVHS) and by the 30-s chair sit-to-stand test (30-s CST). These endpoints were assessed at baseline (t0); middle (t1; after 8 or 12 wk of t0); and at the end of chemotherapy (t2; after 20 wk of t0). Mean changes from baseline were assessed by an intention-to-treat approach.

RESULTS

Mixed linear model analyses showed that Exercise group experienced less deterioration in several domains of QLQ-C30 at t2, including in global health status/QoL (Δ = 9.39 units; P = 0.034), QLQ-C30 summary score (Δ = 8.08 units; P < 0.001), physical (Δ = 15.14 units; P < 0.001), role ( Δ = 21.81 units; P < 0.001), cognitive (Δ = 9.16 units; P = 0.032) and social functioning (Δ = 11.67 units; P = 0.038), compared with the UC group. Similarly, Exercise group exhibited significant lower levels of fatigue (Δ = -20.19 units; P < 0.001) and appetite loss (Δ = -13.69 units; P = 0.034), compared with the UC group. Significant between-group differences were observed on MVHS of the tumor/surgery upper limb side (Δ = 2.64 kg; P < 0.001) and contralateral limb (Δ = 2.22 kg; P < 0.001), and on the 30-s CST score (Δ = 3.56repetitions; P < 0.001), favoring the Exercise group. No differences were observed on QLQ-BR23 domains.

CONCLUSIONS

Exercise training was an effective complementary therapy to prevent the deterioration of HRQoL and functional capacity during chemotherapy in women with early-stage BC.

Physical activity and pain in people with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Physical activity can provide analgesic benefit but its effect on cancer-related pain is unclear. This review synthesised and appraised the evidence for the effect of physical activity on pain in people living with or beyond cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search of Ovid Medline and Embase was performed to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs), randomised cross-over studies (RXTs), and prospective observational studies that examined physical activity and pain outcomes in adults living with or beyond cancer. Meta-analyses were performed to generate effect estimates. Risk of bias was assessed, and the GRADE system was used to assess evidence quality.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-one studies (n = 13,806), including 102 RCTs, 6 RXTs, and 13 observational studies, met the criteria for inclusion. Meta-analyses of RCTs identified a decrease in pain intensity (n = 3734; standardised mean difference (SMD) - 0.30; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 0.45, - 0.15) and bodily pain (n = 1170; SMD 0.28; 95% CI 0.01, 0.56) but not pain interference (n = 207; SMD - 0.13, 95% CI - 0.42, 0.15) following physical activity interventions. Individual studies also identified a reduction in pain sensitivity but not analgesic use, although meta-analysis was not possible for these outcomes. High heterogeneity between studies, low certainty in some effect estimates, and possible publication bias meant that evidence quality was graded as very low to low.

CONCLUSION

Physical activity may decrease pain in people living with and beyond cancer; however, high heterogeneity limits the ability to generalise this finding to all people with cancer or to specific types of cancer-related pain.

Updated systematic review of the effects of exercise on understudied health outcomes in cancer survivors

INTRODUCTION

The American College of Sports Medicine provided guidelines for exercise prescriptions in cancer survivors for specific cancer- and treatment-related health outcomes. However, there was insufficient evidence to generate exercise prescriptions for 10 health outcomes of cancer treatment. We sought to update the state of evidence.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of these 10 understudied health outcomes (bone health, sleep, cardiovascular function, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN), cognitive function, falls and balance, nausea, pain, sexual function, and treatment tolerance) and provided an update of evidence.

RESULTS

While the evidence base for each outcome has increased, there remains insufficient evidence to generate exercise prescriptions. Common limitations observed across outcomes included: variability in type and quality of outcome measurement tools, variability in definitions of the health outcomes, a lack of phase III trials, and a majority of trials investigating breast or prostate cancer survivors only.

CONCLUSION

We identified progress in the field of exercise oncology for several understudied cancer- and treatment-related health outcomes. However, we were not able to generate exercise prescriptions due to continued insufficient evidence base. More work is needed to prescribe exercise as medicine for these understudied health outcomes, and our review highlights several strategies to aid in research acceleration within these areas of exercise oncology.

The Effect of Exercise on Pain in People with Cancer: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Cancer-related pain is common and undertreated. Exercise is known to have a pain-relieving effect in non-cancer pain.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to evaluate (1) the effect of exercise on cancer-related pain in all cancers, and (2) whether the effect of exercise differed according to exercise mode, degree of supervision, intervention duration and timing (during or after cancer treatment), pain types, measurement tool and cancer type.

METHODS

Electronic searches were undertaken in six databases to identify exercise studies evaluating pain in people with cancer, published prior to 11 January 2023. All stages of screening and data extraction were conducted independently by two authors. The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) was used and overall strength of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Meta-analyses were performed overall and by study design, exercise intervention and pain characteristics.

RESULTS

In total, 71 studies reported in 74 papers were eligible for inclusion. The overall meta-analysis included 5877 participants and showed reductions in pain favouring exercise (standardised mean difference - 0.45; 95% confidence interval - 0.62, - 0.28). For most (> 82%) of the subgroup analyses, the direction of effect favoured exercise compared with usual care, with effect sizes ranging from small to large (median effect size - 0.35; range - 0.03 to - 1.17). The overall strength of evidence for the effect of exercise on cancer-related pain was very low.

CONCLUSION

The findings provide support that exercise participation does not worsen cancer-related pain and that it may be beneficial. Better pain categorisation and inclusion of more diverse cancer populations in future research would improve understanding of the extent of benefit and to whom.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021266826.

Update on Prevalence of Pain in Patients with Cancer 2022: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

Experiencing pain and insufficient relief can be devastating and negatively affect a patient's quality of life. Developments in oncology such as new treatments and adjusted pain management guidelines may have influenced the prevalence of cancer pain and severity in patients. This review aims to provide an overview of the prevalence and severity of pain in cancer patients in the 2014-2021 literature period. A systematic literature search was performed using the databases PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane. Titles and abstracts were screened, and full texts were evaluated and assessed on methodological quality. A meta-analysis was performed on the pooled prevalence and severity rates. A meta-regression analysis was used to explore differences between treatment groups. We identified 10,637 studies, of which 444 studies were included. The overall prevalence of pain was 44.5%. Moderate to severe pain was experienced by 30.6% of the patients, a lower proportion compared to previous research. Pain experienced by cancer survivors was significantly lower compared to most treatment groups. Our results imply that both the prevalence of pain and pain severity declined in the past decade. Increased attention to the assessment and management of pain might have fostered the decline in the prevalence and severity of pain.

Supervised exercise therapy compared with no exercise therapy to reverse debilitating effects of androgen deprivation therapy in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with prostate cancer can have several debilitating side effects. Supervised exercise is recommended to ameliorate these negative effects.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically evaluate the effect of supervised exercise therapy compared to no exercise therapy in patients with prostate cancer undergoing ADT, primarily according to the patient critical outcomes, 'disease-specific quality of life' and 'walking performance' measured at end of treatment.

METHODS

We searched PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Cinahl and Pedro, to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs), which investigated the effect of supervised exercise therapy compared to no exercise therapy in patients with prostate cancer receiving ADT, last search: June 2021. Two independent reviewers extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and evaluated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE-method.

RESULTS

Eigthteen RCTs (n = 1477) comprised patients with prostate cancer stages T1-T4 were included in the meta-analyses. Compared to no exercise therapy, supervised exercise therapy showed clinically relevant improvements in 'disease-specific quality of life' and 'walking performance'. The standardised mean differences were 0.43 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.29, 0.58) and -0.41 (95% CI: -0.60, -0.22), respectively. The overall certainty of evidence was moderate due to serious risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of moderate quality shows that supervised exercise therapy probably is superior to no exercise therapy in improving 'disease-specific quality of life' and 'walking performance' in patients with prostate cancer undergoing ADT. The results apply to all patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy regardless of cancer stage. The results support a strong recommendation for supervised exercise therapy for managing side effects in this population.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

NKR-38-Focused-questions-PICOs-for-updating1.ashx (sst.dk).

Do Patients with Prostate Cancer Benefit from Exercise Interventions? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Men diagnosed and treated for prostate cancer experience severe adverse effects on quality of life (QoL) and metabolic health, some of which may be preventable or reversible with exercise, the benefits of which healthcare providers and patients increasingly acknowledge, though existing evidence on its effects varies in significance and magnitude. We aimed to review the effect of exercise on QoL and metabolic health in a broad prostate cancer population. A systematic search was conducted in nine databases and eligible trials were included in the meta-analytic procedure. All outcomes were stratified into aerobic exercise, resistance exercise, and a combination of both. The review identified 33 randomised controlled trials (2567 participants) eligible for inclusion. Exercise had a borderline small positive effect on cancer-specific QoL (standardised mean difference (SMD) = 0.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.01-0.22), and a moderate to large effect on cardiovascular fitness (SMD = 0.46, 95% CI 0.34-0.59) with aerobic exercise being the superior modality (SMD = 0.60, 95% CI 0.29-0.90). A positive significant effect was seen in lower body strength, whole-body fat mass, general mental health, and blood pressure. No significant effect was seen in fatigue, lean body mass, and general physical health. We thereby conclude that exercise is effective in improving metabolic health in men diagnosed with prostate cancer, with aerobic exercise as the superior modality. The effect of exercise on QoL was small and not mediated by choice of exercise modality.

Effects of Exercise During Radiation Therapy on Physical Function and Treatment-Related Side Effects in Men With Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Radiation therapy is a commonly used treatment for prostate cancer; however, the side effects may negatively affect quality of life and cause patients to be less physically active. Although exercise has been shown to mitigate radiation therapy-related fatigue in men with prostate cancer during radiation therapy, other adverse effects of treatment such as physical deconditioning, urinary symptoms, or sexual dysfunction have not been systematically reviewed in this patient population. Thus, the purpose of this review was to investigate the effect of exercise on physical function and treatment-related side effects in men with prostate cancer undergoing radiation therapy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Embase, CINAHL Plus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases in December 2020. Included studies were randomized controlled trials examining the effects of aerobic and/or resistance exercise interventions on measures of physical function and treatment-related side effects in prostate cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy. Meta-analysis was performed on outcomes that were reported in 2 or more studies.

RESULTS

Seven publications from 6 randomized controlled trials involving 391 prostate cancer patients were included. Patients had stage I to IV cancer with a Gleason score of ≤6 to 10. Exercise resulted in consistent significant benefits for physical function in terms of cardiovascular fitness (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31-1.36; P < .01) and muscle function (SMD, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.53-2.07; P < .01). Furthermore, there was a significant positive effect of exercise on urinary toxicity (SMD, -0.71; 95% CI, -1.25 to -0.18; P < .01), but not on intestinal (P = .21) or hormonal toxicity (P = .41), depression (P = .45), or sleep symptoms (P = .88).

CONCLUSION

Based on the current evidence, exercise in men with prostate cancer undergoing radiation therapy improves physical function and mitigates urinary toxicity. The effect of exercise on other treatment-related side effects are less clear and require further investigation.