MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735448369 · doi:10.1002/cncr.30859

Effects of high‐intensity aerobic interval training on cardiovascular disease risk in testicular cancer survivors: A phase 2 randomized controlled trial

2017· article· en· W2735448369 on OpenAlexaff
Scott C. Adams, Darren S. DeLorey, Margie H. Davenport, Michael K. Stickland, Adrian Fairey, Scott North, Alexander Szczotka, Kerry S. Courneya

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTesticular diseases and treatments
Canadian institutionsAlberta Cancer FoundationAlberta Hospital EdmontonUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiorespiratory fitnessHigh-intensity interval trainingAerobic exerciseInternal medicineInterval trainingFramingham Risk ScoreCardiologyPhysical therapyPopulationRandomized controlled trialArterial stiffnessDiseaseBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND Testicular cancer survivors (TCS) have an increased risk of treatment‐related cardiovascular disease (CVD), which may limit their overall survival. We evaluated the effects of high‐intensity aerobic interval training (HIIT) on traditional and novel CVD risk factors and surrogate markers of mortality in a population‐based sample of TCS. METHODS This phase 2 trial ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02459132) randomly assigned 63 TCS to usual care (UC) or 12 weeks of supervised HIIT (ie, alternating periods of vigorous‐intensity and light‐intensity aerobic exercise). The primary outcome was peak aerobic fitness (VO2peak) assessed via a treadmill‐based maximal cardiorespiratory exercise test. Secondary endpoints included CVD risk (eg, Framingham Risk Score), arterial health, parasympathetic nervous system function, and blood‐based biomarkers. RESULTS Postintervention VO2peak data were obtained for 61 participants (97%). HIIT participants attended 99% of the exercise sessions and achieved 98% of the target exercise intensity. Analysis of covariance demonstrated that HIIT was superior to UC for improving VO2peak (adjusted between‐group mean difference, 3.7 mL O2/kg/min; 95% confidence interval, 2.4‐5.1 [P<.001]) and multiple secondary outcomes including CVD risk (P = .011), arterial thickness (P<.001), arterial stiffness (P<.001), postexercise parasympathetic reactivation (P = .001), inflammation (P = .045), and low‐density lipoprotein (P = .014). Overall, HIIT reduced the prevalence of modifiable CVD risk factors by 20% compared with UC. CONCLUSIONS This randomized trial provides the first evidence that HIIT improves cardiorespiratory fitness, multiple pathways of CVD risk, and surrogate markers of mortality in TCS. These findings have important implications for the management of TCS. Further research concerning the long‐term effects of HIIT on CVD morbidity and mortality in TCS is warranted. Cancer 2017;123:4057‐65. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations101
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicTesticular diseases and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207