Effect of exercise training on cardiorespiratory fitness, quality of life and objectively measured physical activity in patients undergoing anthracycline-based chemotherapy: the Caprice RCT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Exercise training based cardio-oncologic rehabilitation programmes (ET) were shown to counteract the loss in cardiorespiratory fitness and quality of life (QoL) and reduce cancer fatigue during anthracycline-based chemotherapies (AC). It is unknown whether these changes are due to greater volumes of physical activity (PA) induced by ET and whether ET is associated with greater objectively measured daily PA compared to guideline-based recommendation of PA. Method Patients with breast cancer or lymphoma receiving AC were recruited from four cancer centres in Switzerland and randomly assigned to three months centre-based ET during (EXduringAC) or after (EXpostAC) AC. All patients were counselled on guideline directed PA and PA was measured with an activity tracker. Primary endpoints were peak VO2, fatigue and QoL after AC (AC-end) and at 3 months follow-up. PA and steps were compared between days with and without centre-based training session. Results Data of 51 patients were available. Neither Intention-to-Treat (ITT) nor Per-Protocol (PP) analyses revealed between group differences with regard to peak VO2, fatigue, and QoL at neither AC-end nor follow-up (Figure 1). There was also no between group difference with regard to PA and steps, however, compared to EXpostAC, in EXduringAC the steep decline in PA and steps in AC cycles 3 and 4 was prevented (PP analysis, Figure 2). PA on days with centre-based training sessions was 28 (95% confidence interval 24-32) min higher and patients performed 4382 (3995-4768) steps more compared to days without centre-based training sessions. Conclusion ET performed during or after AC had no additional effect on changes in peak VO2, fatigue, or QoL assessed at AC-end or follow-up compared to using an activity tracker alone, possibly due to the lack of additional PA completed by patients during ET. This is the first study that objectively measured the effect of ET on PA and daily step count during and following AC. While days with centre-based ET had significantly more PA and steps, this surplus was likely to be compensated on days without centre-based ET.Figure 1Figure 2
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".