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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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 (VO 2peak ) 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 VO 2peak 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 VO 2peak (adjusted between‐group mean difference, 3.7 mL O 2 /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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
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