Physical activity and dexamethasone for cancer related fatigue: A preliminary placebo controlled randomized control trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
12050 Background: Despite high frequency and significant impact on quality of life, there are limited treatment options available for cancer related fatigue (CRF) in patients with advanced cancer. The primary aim of the study was to determine the feasibility (adherence, safety, and satisfaction) of the combination therapy, physical activity (PA) plus Dexamethasone (Dex); and PA plus placebo (Pl) for CRF. The secondary aim was to explore the effects of PA+Dex, and PA+Pl on CRF as assessed by Functional Assessment of Cancer Illness Therapy–fatigue (FACIT-F). Methods: In this phase 2, randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trial, patients with advanced cancer with CRF ≥ 4/10 on Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale were eligible. Patients were randomized to standardized PA for 4 weeks plus either 4mg of Dex (PA+Dex arm), or Pl (PA+PL arm) BID for the first 7 days. Changes in FACIT-F scores from baseline to Day 8, and Day 29 were assessed. Other outcomes included change in quality-of-life scores. Results: A total of64 (89%) patients were evaluable. The median (IQR) changes in FACIT-F scores at Day 8 and Day 29 from baseline were 9 (2,16), P< 0.001; 5.75 (0,12.5), P=0.015 for PA+ Dex arm, and 3.5 (-2.13, 10), P=0.054; 6.50 (2.5, 15.5), P=0.006 for PA+ Pl arm respectively. Exploratory Linear Mixed Model (LMM) analysis showed significant treatment effect of PA +Dex, with treatment having improvement of 5.63 units for FACIT-F scores (95% Cl 1.74,9.52), P=0.005. Effect sizes for improvement of FACIT-F scores at Day 8 and Day 29 were -3.49, -2.43 in PA+Dex arm; and -1.93, -2.72 in PA+Pl arm, respectively. Effect sizes for change in fatigue related symptoms and quality of life scores as assessed by Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System-Fatigue T-scores, Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form total, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy -General scores at Day 8, and Day 29 in PA+ Dex arm were 2.93 (P=0.005), 2.82 (P=0.005); 2.27 (P=0.023), 2.68 (P=0.007); -2.39 (P=0.017), -3.26 (P=0.001) respectively. Adherence to Dex and Pl were 91% and 92%, respectively, Satisfaction rates with PA+Dex and PA+Pl arms were 98% and 79%, respectively. There was no significant difference in grade ≥3 adverse events between the two arms (P = 0.36). Conclusions: Satisfaction, and tolerability to the combination therapy, and medication adherence was excellent.PA + Dex significantly improved CRF at day 8 and 29. The improvement was sustained 3 weeks after discontinuation of Dex. Further larger studies are justified. Clinical trial information: NCT03583255 .
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".