MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970229681 · doi:10.3109/0284186x.2015.1037008

Effects of strength training on body composition, physical functioning, and quality of life in prostate cancer patients during androgen deprivation therapy

2015· article· en· W1970229681 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Oncologica · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersEkstraStiftelsen Helse og Rehabilitering (Stiftelsen Dam)University of Hong KongKreftforeningen
KeywordsMedicineAndrogen deprivation therapyLean body massProstate cancerQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyInternal medicineCancerBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) increases survival rates in prostate cancer (PCa) patients with locally advanced disease, but is associated with side effects that may impair daily function. Strength training may counteract several side effects of ADT, such as changes in body composition and physical functioning, which in turn may affect health-related quality of life (HRQOL). However, additional randomised controlled trials are needed to expand this knowledge. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-eight PCa patients on ADT were randomised to either 16 weeks of high-load strength training (n = 28) or usual care (n = 30). The primary outcome was change in total lean body mass (LBM) assessed by dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Secondary outcomes were changes in regional LBM, fat mass, and areal bone mineral density (aBMD) measured by DXA; physical functioning assessed by 1-repetition maximum (1RM) tests, sit-to-stand test, stair climbing test and Shuttle walk test; and HRQOL as measured by the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: No statistically significant effect of high-load strength training was demonstrated on total LBM (p = 0.16), but significant effects were found on LBM in the lower and upper extremities (0.49 kg, p < 0.01 and 0.15 kg, p < 0.05, respectively). Compared to usual care, high-load strength training showed no effect on fat mass, aBMD or HRQOL, but beneficial effects were observed in all 1RM tests, sit-to-stand test and stair climbing tests. Adherence to the training program was 88% for lower body exercises and 84% for upper body exercises. In summary, high-load strength training improved LBM in extremities and physical functioning, but had no effect on fat mass, aBMD, or HRQOL in PCa patients on ADT.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it