Novel multimodal intervention for surgical prehabilitation on functional recovery and muscle characteristics in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (MMP-LUNG)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths. Patients with stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are candidates for surgical resection; however, patients with low muscle mass, myosteatosis, malnutrition or reduced functional capacity preoperatively have a higher risk of postoperative morbidity. Prehabilitation is a care process aiming to enhance functional capacity before surgery to improve surgical outcomes. Study objectives are to test the effect of prehabilitation interventions of a mixed-nutrient supplement (NUT) alone or its combination with exercise (MM, multimodal prehabilitation), compared with placebo-control (CTL), in NSCLC patients on change in functional capacity pre-surgery and post-discharge, muscle mass and myosteatosis, postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQoL), complications and length of hospital stay. We hypothesise that a multi-nutrient supplement, with or without exercise, will be of benefit. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Randomised controlled trial of three parallel arms: 168 patients with operable NSCLC at nutritional risk are randomised 1:1:1 to CTL, NUT or MM. Patients in the NUT and MM groups receive a nutritional supplement consisting of whey protein, leucine, vitamin D and fish oil 4-6 weeks preoperatively and 6 weeks post-discharge. The exercise programme (MM) consists of daily moderate-intensity aerobic activity and resistance training 3 days/week. The following is assessed at baseline, preoperatively and week six post-discharge: functional capacity using the 6 min walk test, muscle mass and myosteatosis using D3-creatine dilution and peripheral quantitative CT, and HRQoL using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung. Intention-to-treat analysis of covariance will compare between-group differences adjusted for baseline variables. Postoperative functional recovery will be tested by logistic regression. Between-group differences in clinical outcomes will be tested, applying Bonferroni correction. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial is approved by the McGill University Health Centre Research Ethics Board (2022-7782). Results will be published in open-access peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS: NCT05955248.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".