Exercise during chemotherapy: Friend or foe?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A higher chemotherapy completion rate is associated with better outcomes including treatment efficacy and overall survival. Exercise may have the potential to improve relative dose intensity (RDI) by reducing the frequency and severity of chemotherapy-related toxicities. We examined the association between exercise adherence and RDI and possible clinical- and health-related fitness predictors of RDI. METHODS: Chemotherapy records were extracted from the electronic medical record for patients enrolled in the ENACT trial (n = 105). Chemotherapy completion was assessed using average RDI. A threshold of 85% was established for "high" versus "low" RDI. Logistic regression analyses were used to estimate the associations between the clinical- and health-related fitness predictors of RDI. RESULTS: Patients with breast cancer (BC) had a significantly higher average RDI (89.8% ± 17.6%) compared with gastrointestinal cancer (GI) (76.8% ± 20.9%, p = 0.004) and pancreatic cancer (PC) (65.2% ± 20.1%, p < 0.001). Only 25% of BC patents required a dose reduction compared to 56.3% of GI and 86.4% of PC patients. Cancer site was significantly associated with RDI. Compared with BC, patients with GI (β = -0.12, p = 0.03) and PC (β = -0.22, p = 0.006) achieved significantly lower RDI. Every 2.72 unit increase in overall exercise adherence led to a significant 7% decrease in RDI (p = 0.001) in GI patients. Metastatic GI patients had a 15% RDI increase for every 2.72 unit increase in exercise adherence (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Exercise is a supportive therapy that has potential to enhance chemotherapy tolerance and completion. The relationship between exercise adherence and RDI is influenced by factor such as cancer site and treatment type. Special attention must be paid to how exercise is prescribed to ensure that exercise adherence does not negatively affect RDI. Cancer site, exercise dosage, and multimodal interventions to address toxicities are key areas identified for future research.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.006 | 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".