A Randomized Trial of the Effects of Exercise on Anxiety, Fear of Cancer Progression and Quality of Life in Prostate Cancer Patients on Active Surveillance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We examined the effects of exercise on prostate cancer-specific anxiety, fear of cancer progression, quality of life and psychosocial outcomes in patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The ERASE (Exercise during Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer) Trial randomized 52 patients with prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance to high-intensity interval training (HIIT, 26 patients) or usual care (UC, 26 patients). The HIIT group performed a 12-week, thrice weekly, supervised, aerobic HIIT program. The UC group did not exercise. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed at baseline and after intervention, including prostate cancer-specific anxiety (Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer), fear of cancer progression (Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory), prostate cancer symptoms (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite), quality of life (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core) and psychological health outcomes (eg fatigue, stress and self-esteem). Analysis of covariance was used to compare between-group differences. RESULTS: Fifty of 52 participants (96%) completed patient-reported outcome assessments at 12 weeks. Adherence to HIIT was 96%. Compared to UC, HIIT significantly improved total prostate cancer-specific anxiety (adjusted between-group mean difference -2.7, 95% confidence interval, range -5.0 to -0.4, p=0.024), as well as the fear of progression subscale (p=0.013), hormonal symptoms (p=0.005), perceived stress (p=0.037), fatigue (p=0.029) and self-esteem (p=0.007). CONCLUSIONS: A 12-week supervised HIIT program may improve prostate cancer-specific anxiety, fear of cancer progression, hormone symptoms, stress, fatigue and self-esteem in men with prostate cancer on active surveillance. Larger trials are needed to confirm the effects of HIIT on patient-reported outcomes in the active surveillance setting.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".