MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400677852 · doi:10.1093/jncics/pkae058

Effect of resistance training on physical function during chemotherapy in colon cancer

2024· article· en· W4400677852 on OpenAlex
Justin C. Brown, Shengping Yang, Stephanie L. E. Compton, Kristin L. Campbell, Elizabeth M. Cespedes Feliciano, Sara K. Quinney, Barbara Sternfeld, Bette J. Caan, Jeffrey A. Meyerhardt, Kathryn H. Schmitz

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJNCI Cancer Spectrum · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineIsometric exerciseRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyBalance (ability)Quality of life (healthcare)Resistance trainingInternal medicineColorectal cancerCancerNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The decline of physical function during chemotherapy predicts poor quality of life and premature death. It is unknown if resistance training prevents physical function decline during chemotherapy in colon cancer survivors. METHODS: This multicenter trial randomly assigned 181 colon cancer survivors receiving postoperative chemotherapy to home-based resistance training or usual care control. Physical function outcomes included the short physical performance battery, isometric handgrip strength, and the physical function subscale of the Medical Outcomes Short-Form 36-item questionnaire. Mixed models for repeated measures quantified estimated treatment differences. RESULTS: At baseline, participants had a mean (SD) age of 55.2 (12.8) years; 67 (37%) were 60 years or older, and 29 (16%) had a composite short physical performance battery score of no more than 9. Compared with usual care control, resistance training did not improve the composite short physical performance battery score (estimated treatment difference = -0.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.32 to 0.31; P = .98) or the short physical performance battery scores for balance (estimated treatment difference = 0.01, 95% CI = -0.10 to 0.11; P = .93), gait speed (estimated treatment difference = 0.08, 95% CI = -0.06 to 0.22; P = .28), and sit-to-stand (estimated treatment difference = -0.08, 95% CI = -0.29 to 0.13; P = .46). Compared with usual care control, resistance training did not improve isometric handgrip strength (estimated treatment difference = 1.50 kg, 95% CI = -1.06 to 4.05; P = .25) or self-reported physical function (estimated treatment difference = -3.55, 95% CI = -10.03 to 2.94); P = .28). The baseline short physical performance battery balance score (r = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.07 to 0.35) and handgrip strength (r = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.09 to 0.36) correlated with chemotherapy relative dose intensity. CONCLUSION: Among colon cancer survivors with relatively high physical functioning, random assignment to home-based resistance training did not prevent physical function decline during chemotherapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03291951.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it