Comparing Appetite and Dietary Intake Responses to Resistance Exercise in Breast Cancer Survivors Undergoing Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy Versus Individuals Without Cancer: A Secondary Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Breast cancer survivors (BCS) undergoing adjuvant endocrine therapy have increased risk of obesity. Estrogen and exercise suppress appetite in non-BCS populations, but their combined effects in BCS are unknown. This secondary analysis compared the impact of acute resistance exercise (REx) on appetite and energy intake in estrogen-suppressed BCS versus females without cancer (‘non-BCS’). Premenopausal inactive BCS (stage 0-III estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, <5 years post-diagnosis, undergoing estrogen-targeted therapy) and non-BCS completed REx or sedentary (SED) conditions 35 min after a standardized breakfast. Appetite visual analog scales and hormones (ghrelin and peptide-YY [PYY]) were measured before and after breakfast and REx/SED; energy intake was assessed 3 h post-breakfast (1.5 h post-REx or SED). Fifteen BCS (age: 46 ± 7; BMI: 25.0 ± 3.8 kg/m2) and 12 non-BCS (age: 37 ± 8; BMI: 29.0 ± 5.1 kg/m2) were included. BCS showed greater PYY 90 and 120 min post-breakfast compared to non-BCS, particularly after REx (group x time x condition: p = 0.009, p = 0.005, respectively). No group effects were observed for ghrelin. BCS had lower body mass-adjusted energy intake compared to non-BCS (p = 0.036), despite similar appetite ratings. Estrogen-suppressed BCS exhibit heightened PYY and lower energy intake after REx, revealing novel effects of exercise on appetite in a state of low estrogen.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".