Prehabilitation in an Integrative Medicine Day Clinic for Patients Undergoing Neoadjuvant Treatment: Single-Center Feasibility Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer receiving neoadjuvant treatment prior to surgery are in a very stressful situation. Chemotherapy and radiation therapy put a strain on the quality of life and the pending surgery poses a relevant burden for many patients. Preparation of these patients for the intervention in terms of prehabilitation has great potential to reduce the burden of postoperative complications and may improve the clinical outcome. A prehabilitation approach also yields the possibility to address unmet patients' needs and to help them modify their lifestyle in a maintainable way. Therefore, a multimodal approach is mandatory during this critical period. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of prehabilitation in an integrative medicine day clinic (PRIME-DC) prior to cancer surgery at a major university clinic. PRIME-DC is considered feasible if 80% of enrolled patients are willing and able to complete at least 6 out of the 8 weekly meetings, each lasting 6.5 hours, at such a clinic. Secondary end points aim to evaluate this multimodal program. METHODS: The PRIME-DC intervention combines mind-body medicine, exercise therapy, nutrition therapy, naturopathic counseling, and the application of a yarrow liver compress. Adult patients with cancer, with a primary tumor in the abdomen (including intraperitoneal cancer, stomach cancer, and extraperitoneal cancers such as pancreatic, bladder, rectal, esophageal, endometrial, ovarian, and cervical cancer) or the breast requiring a neoadjuvant oncological treatment setting are eligible to participate. The addressed cancer entities imply either an extensive surgical intervention with an expected need for prehabilitation (eg, abdominal surgery) or a neoadjuvant treatment of several months with a high burden of treatment-associated side effects (breast cancer). Adherence to the day clinic program is the primary end point being defined as presence during the day clinic session. Secondary end points are physical assessment and quality of life, together with a structured assessment of neoadjuvant treatment-associated side effects. Furthermore, to collect qualitative data voluntary participants of the day clinic will be interviewed in a semistructured way after completion of the day clinic program on each component of the study (mind-body intervention, exercise, nutrition, naturopathic counseling, and a yarrow liver compress). RESULTS: The procedures used in this study adhere to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki. As of February 2023, we enrolled 23 patients; the dominant cancer entity is breast cancer (18 enrolled patients). CONCLUSIONS: The presented protocol combines prehabilitation, lifestyle modification, naturopathic counseling, dietary assistance, and naturopathic treatment in an innovative and integrative way. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00028126; https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00028126. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/46765.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".