Randomized Controlled Trial of Exercise Training in Postmenopausal Breast Cancer Survivors: Cardiopulmonary and Quality of Life Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the effects of exercise training on cardiopulmonary function and quality of life (QOL) in postmenopausal breast cancer survivors who had completed surgery, radiotherapy, and/or chemotherapy with or without current hormone therapy use. METHODS: Fifty-three postmenopausal breast cancer survivors were randomly assigned to an exercise (n = 25) or control (n = 28) group. The exercise group trained on cycle ergometers three times per week for 15 weeks at a power output that elicited the ventilatory equivalent for carbon dioxide. The control group did not train. The primary outcomes were changes in peak oxygen consumption and overall QOL from baseline to postintervention. Peak oxygen consumption was assessed by a graded exercise test using gas exchange analysis. Overall QOL was assessed by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast scale. RESULTS: Fifty-two participants completed the trial. The exercise group completed 98.4% of the exercise sessions. Baseline values for peak oxygen consumption (P =.254) and overall QOL (P =.286) did not differ between groups. Peak oxygen consumption increased by 0.24 L/min in the exercise group, whereas it decreased by 0.05 L/min in the control group (mean difference, 0.29 L/min; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 0.40; P <.001). Overall QOL increased by 9.1 points in the exercise group compared with 0.3 points in the control group (mean difference, 8.8 points; 95% CI, 3.6 to 14.0; P =.001). Pearson correlations indicated that change in peak oxygen consumption correlated with change in overall QOL (r = 0.45; P <.01). CONCLUSION: Exercise training had beneficial effects on cardiopulmonary function and QOL in postmenopausal breast cancer survivors.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".