Impact of Exercise on Chemotherapy Tolerance and Survival in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Available preliminary evidence is conflicting on whether exercise can positively influence antineoplastic treatment tolerance and in turn improve survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study compared chemotherapy treatment tolerance and survival among women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer who participated in a single-arm trial of supervised aerobic and resistance exercise programming versus a historical cohort that did not receive structured exercise programming. RESULTS: The exercise group (EX; n=73) and control group (CTR; n=85) participants were matched on age and treatment and balanced on medical history, cancer diagnosis, and body mass index. Attendance in the EX group was 64% ± 27% of 3 offered sessions per week. For all chemotherapy agents combined, the relative risk (RR) of a chemotherapy dose reduction (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.54-1.11) or delay (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.62-1.80) did not differ between groups. However, the EX group had reduced relative and absolute risks of a dose reduction in doxorubicin by 60% and 18%, respectively. For all agents combined, there were no differences between groups in risk of anemia, neutropenia, or weight gain. In the EX group, dose reductions due to neutropenia (P=.027), other infections (P=.049), and fatigue (P=.037) were less common, whereas mucositis was more common (P=.023), compared with the CTR group. The EX group had reduced relative and absolute risks of weight gain on the docetaxel + cyclophosphamide regimen by 38% and 30%, respectively. After a median follow-up of 70 months (range, 54-84 months), there was no difference between the EX and CTR groups in disease-free survival events (n=8 [11%] vs n=9 [11%], respectively; log-rank test, P=.78) or overall survival events (n=5 [7%] vs n=6 [7%], respectively; log-rank test, P=.974). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, exercise programming during adjuvant chemotherapy does not appear to impact treatment tolerance or survival in women receiving common modern regimens of adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. However, exercise may provide selective benefits, depending on the treatment regimen received.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".