MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Exercise During Breast Cancer Treatment: Results Of The NEXT-BRCA Randomized Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W4414242157 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jenna Smith‐Turchyn, Derek W. Stouth, Joshua A.J. Keogh, Julie Richardson, Som D. Mukherjee

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialAnalysis of covarianceAerobic exerciseBreast cancerBooster (rocketry)Physical activity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine the feasibility and effectiveness of institution-based exercise and self-management education on improving outcomes for individuals receiving treatment for breast cancer (BC). METHODS: A hybrid implementation-effectiveness study was conducted at a single site in Canada. Eligible participants included adult females with a current diagnosis of stage 1-3 BC undergoing treatment. Participants were randomized to one of three groups: 1) Exercise and self-management (EXSM; 8 in person sessions of moderate intensity aerobic exercise, self-management education, 4 booster sessions), 2) SM only (8 virtual sessions of self-management education, 4 booster sessions), or 3) usual care (no intervention). Feasibility (recruitment, retention, and adherence rates) and effectiveness (physical activity level (primary), exercise knowledge and behaviour, perception of health status, quality of life, and physical functioning) were assessed pre and post intervention, and at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Descriptive statistics described feasibility outcomes and an ANCOVA was used to assess effectiveness over time. RESULTS: Eighty-five participants enrolled in the study. Most were 40-60 years of age (56%), living with stage 2 BC (46%), and receiving chemotherapy (68%). Feasibility outcomes demonstrated a recruitment rate of 72%, retention rates of 75% (EXSM) and 93% (SM), and adherence rates of 76% (EXSM) and 93% (SM). ANCOVA analysis demonstrated a significant effect of group and timepoint interaction on all outcomes. The EXSM group showed a significant improvement in our primary outcome, physical activity level, compared to UC at the post-intervention (t = 6.00, p < 0.001), 6-month follow-up (t = 9.70, p < 0.001), and 12-month follow-up (t = 7.85, p < 0.001). The SM only group also showed a significant improvement compared to UC at all three timepoints (post-intervention: t = 6.87, p < 0.006; 6-month follow-up: t = 8.67, p < 0.001; 12-month follow up: t = 8.90, p < 0.001). No adverse events occurred during the intervention. CONCLUSION: Institution-based exercise and virtual self-management is feasible for individuals with BC during treatment and is effective in improving outcomes. Future research should consider triaging exercise strategies based on an individual’s cancer and personal characteristics. Supported by: Juravinski Hospital and Cancer Centre Foundation (Grant #T210)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicCancer survivorship and care→French-language works237,207→