Abstract P2-12-03: A pilot study evaluating the benefits and feasibility of an exercise program for breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND: Breast cancer chemotherapy is frequently associated with a decline in general physical condition, exercise tolerance, muscle strength and quality of life (QOL). Evidence suggests that physical activity and exercise interventions during chemotherapy treatment may contribute to maintaining QOL, cardiorespiratory fitness and strength, however the results of studies conducted to date have not been consistent. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the effect of a structured, tailored exercise program involving both aerobic and resistance training, on QOL, physical function, and body composition in breast cancer patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: Women who were within 4–12 weeks of surgery for stage I-III breast cancer and undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy, were randomized to either a structured exercise program (6 months) or to usual oncology care. Functional assessment of cancer therapy-breast cancer (FACT-B), and Short Form Survey (SF-36), weight, waist circumference, waist hip ratio, percent body fat, peak oxygen, strength and arm volume were performed at baseline, and 3-month intervals through 12 months. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months for all endpoints. The Wilcoxon Rank-sum Nonparametric test was applied for all Primary and Secondary endpoints with changing scores at each follow-up visit, p-value < 0.05 was considered as statistical significance. RESULTS: Of the recruited 62 women, 51 completed all 12 months. One patient developed metastatic disease and 10 others withdrew (4 in the exercise arm and 6 in the standard arm). Median age was 48 (24–75) years. There was a general trend of improvement from baseline for most components of the FACT-B and SF-36 for the exercise group but only the FACT-B social wellbeing was statistically significant at 3 months with a p = 0.0164. Changes in other FACT-B and SF-36 scores were not significantly different between exercise and usual care groups. There were significant improvements at 6 months in weight (p = 0.0192), % body fat (p = 0.0337), max strength (p = 0.0029), and waist circumference (0.0359) and at 12 months in weight (p = 0.0293), % body fat (p = 0.0481), max strength (p = 0.0097) and endurance (p = 0.0037) in the exercise group compared to usual care. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized prospective study suggests benefit of exercise during chemotherapy. This benefit continued 6 months beyond the completion of the exercise program with significant improvement in physical function, body composition, strength and endurance with no decline in quality of life. Regular moderate exercise may play an important role in improving function during adjuvant chemotherapy and should be further studied in a large randomized trial. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-12-03.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".