Exercise and QUality Diet after Leukemia: A Randomized Weight Loss Trial among Adult Survivors of Childhood Leukemia in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obesity is prevalent in childhood cancer survivors and interacts with cancer treatments to potentiate risk for cardiovascular (CV) death. We tested a remote weight-loss intervention trial that was effective among adults with CV risk factors in a cohort of adult survivors of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) with overweight/obesity. METHODS: In this phase III efficacy trial, survivors of ALL enrolled in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study with a body mass index ≥25 kg/m2 were randomized to a remotely delivered weight-loss intervention versus self-directed weight loss, stratified by history of cranial radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was the difference in weight loss at 24 months in an intent-to-treat analysis. Analyses were performed using linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Among 358 survivors (59% female; median attained age: 37 years; IQR: 33-43 years), the baseline mean (SD) weight was 98.6 kg (24.0) for the intervention group (n = 181) and 94.9 kg (20.3) for controls (n = 177). Adherence to the intervention was poor; 15% of individuals in the intervention group completed 24/30 planned coaching calls. Weight at 24 months was available for 274 (77%) participants. After controlling for cranial radiotherapy, sex, race/ethnicity, and age, the mean (SE) change in weight from baseline to 24 months was -0.4 kg (0.8) for the intervention group and 0.2 kg (0.6) for control participants (P = 0.59). CONCLUSIONS: A remote weight-loss intervention that was successful among adults with CV conditions did not result in significant weight loss among adult survivors of childhood ALL. IMPACT: Future interventions in this population must be tailored to the unique needs of survivors to encourage engagement and adherence. See related In the Spotlight, p. 1147.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".