Effect of resistance training on physical function during chemotherapy in colon cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".