Preliminary Evidence of Improvement in Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors’ Brain Health Following Physical Activity: A Proof-of-Concept Sub-Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cognitive impairment is common among adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors. Physical activity (PA) may help mitigate cognitive impairment post-treatment by positively impacting two indicators of general brain health: fractional anisotropy (FA) and functional connectivity (FC). As part of a two-arm, mixed-methods pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT), this sub-study was designed to provide preliminary proof-of-concept evidence for the effects of PA on FA and FC among AYA cancer survivors post-treatment to help inform decisions about proceeding to larger trials. Methods: AYA cancer survivors who had completed cancer treatment and who were enrolled in a larger pilot RCT comparing a 12-week PA intervention to a waitlist control group, were invited to participate in this sub-study. Sub-study participants completed diffusion tensor imaging and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging prior to randomization and post-intervention. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics, independent component analysis, and paired sample t -tests. Results: Post-intervention, participants showed increases in FA of the bilateral hippocampal cingulum, left anterior corona radiata, middle cingulum, left anterior thalamic radiation, and left cerebellum. A decrease in overall FC of the default mode network and increases in the cerebellar and visual networks were also noted post-intervention ( p < .05). Conclusion: Results provide preliminary evidence for the possible positive effects of PA on FA and FC among AYA cancer survivors post-treatment. On the basis of these results, larger trials assessing the effects of PA on specific brain health indicators, as captured by FA and FC, among AYA cancer survivors are appropriate and warranted.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".