Relationship between exercise behavior, cardiorespiratory fitness, and cognitive function in early breast cancer patients treated with doxorubicin-containing chemotherapy: a pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between self-reported exercise behavior, cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), and cognitive function in early breast cancer patients. Thirty-seven breast cancer patients following completion of chemotherapy (median 16 months) and 14 controls were studied. Cognitive function was assessed using the Central Nervous System (CNS) Vital Signs software (CNS Vital Signs, LLC, Morrisville, N.C., USA), a computerized test battery consisting of 9 cognitive subtests. Exercise behavior was evaluated using the Godin Leisure Time Exercise Questionnaire, and CRF was assessed via a cardiopulmonary exercise test to assess peak oxygen consumption. Patients' mean total exercise was 184 ± 141 min·week(-1) compared with 442 ± 315 min·week(-1) in controls (p < 0.001). Significantly fewer patients (32%) were meeting exercise guidelines (i.e., ≥150 min of moderate-intensity or vigorous exercise per week) compared with 57% of controls (p = 0.014). Patients' peak oxygen consumption averaged 23.5 ± 6.3 mL·kg(-1)·min(-1) compared with 30.6 ± 7.0 mL·kg(-1)·min(-1) in controls (p < 0.01). Scores on the cognitive subdomains were generally lower in patients compared with controls, although only the difference in verbal memory was significant (unadjusted p = 0.041). In patients, weak to moderate correlations were indicated between exercise, peak oxygen consumption, and the majority of cognitive subdomain scores; however, there was a significant positive correlation between exercise and visual memory (r = 0.47, p = 0.004). In conclusion, breast cancer patients following the completion of primary adjuvant chemotherapy exhibit, in general, worse cognitive performance than healthy women from the general population, and such performance may be related to their level of exercise behavior.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".