MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Feasibility of an Aerobic Exercise Intervention in Rectal Cancer Patients During and After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy

2016· article· en· W2471073696 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andria R. Morielli, Nawaid Usmani, Normand G. Boulé, Tirath Nijjar, Kurian Joseph, Keith Tankel, Diane Severin, Kerry S. Courneya

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAerobic exercisePhysical therapyAdverse effectColorectal cancerChemoradiotherapyPhysical fitnessCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer includes 5-6 weeks of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) followed by definitive surgery 6-8 weeks later. NACRT improves outcomes but is also associated with substantial toxicity and side effects including declines in physical fitness that may impede symptom management, treatment response and post-surgical recovery. PURPOSE: The primary purpose of this phase I study was to assess the feasibility and safety of an aerobic exercise intervention in rectal cancer patients during and immediately after NACRT. Changes in objective health-related fitness and patient-reported outcomes were also tracked. METHODS: Rectal cancer patients scheduled to receive NACRT followed by definitive surgery were recruited from the Cross Cancer Institute in Edmonton Alberta. All participants received a supervised moderate intensity aerobic exercise program 3 days/week during NACRT followed by unsupervised aerobic exercise for ≥ 150 minutes/week post-NACRT. Feasibility was determined by eligibility rate, recruitment rate, follow-up rate and exercise adherence. Safety was assessed by tracking any serious adverse events that occurred during exercise testing or the supervised exercise sessions. Health-related fitness and patient-reported outcomes were assessed pre-NACRT, post-NACRT and pre-surgery. RESULTS: Of 45 rectal cancer patients screened, 32 (71%) were eligible and 18 (56%) were recruited. Follow-up rates post-NACRT were 83% for health-related fitness outcomes and 94% for patient-reported outcomes. Patients attended a median of 83% of their supervised exercise sessions and completed an average of 222 ± 155 minutes/week of their unsupervised exercise. No serious adverse events were observed. Most health-related fitness and patient-reported outcomes declined during NACRT and recovered from post-NACRT to pre-surgery. For example, estimated VO2 max declined from pre- to post-NACRT (mean change, -1.3 ml/kg/min; 95% CI, -3.6 to 1.7) and then increased from post-NACRT to pre-surgery (mean change +2.4 ml/kg/min; 95% CI, -0.9 to 5.7). CONCLUSION: Aerobic exercise is feasible and safe for rectal cancer patients during and after NACRT. Phase II randomized trials are needed to establish the benefits and harms of aerobic exercise in this patient population.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicCancer survivorship and care→French-language works237,207→