Effects of Exercise Training on Antitumor Efficacy of Doxorubicin in MDA-MB-231 Breast Cancer Xenografts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Exercise is becoming readily accepted as a beneficial adjunct therapy to maintain or enhance quality of life in breast cancer patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy. An essential precursor to these studies is to investigate whether exercise modulates the antitumor efficacy of chemotherapeutic agents. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Athymic female mice were transplanted with MDA-MB-231 breast xenografts and randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 21 per group): (a) control, (b) exercise-only, (c) doxorubicin-only, or (d) exercise + doxorubicin. Exercise groups performed progressive treadmill running up to 18 m/min at 0% grade for 45 minutes, 5 d/wk for 8 weeks. RESULTS: Tumor growth delay was significantly longer in the doxorubicin-only and exercise + doxorubicin groups compared with the control (median 42 versus 25 days, P = 0.0082; 36 versus 25 days, P = 0.029, respectively) and exercise-only groups (median 42 versus 25 days, P = 0.029; 36 versus 25 days, P = 0.080, respectively). There was no significant difference between the doxorubicin-only and exercise + doxorubicin groups (median 42 versus 36 days, P = 0.33), suggesting that moderate intensity exercise does not significantly influence doxorubicin-induced tumor growth delay. CONCLUSION: These studies are essential to fully understand the safety and application of exercise as a supportive intervention in cancer control.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".