Feasibility of an exercise intervention for fatigued breast cancer patients at a community-based cardiac rehabilitation program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stefanie De Jesus,1 Lyndsay Fitzgeorge,2 Karen Unsworth,3 David Massel,4,5 Neville Suskin,4,5 Harry Prapavessis,1 Michael Sanatani6 1Department of Kinesiology, The University of Western Ontario, 2School of Health Sciences, Fanshawe College, 3Cardiac Rehabilitation & Secondary Prevention Program, St. Joseph’s Hospital, 4Division of Cardiology & Program of Experimental Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Western Ontario, 5Lawson Health Research Institute, 6Department of Medical Oncology, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada Purpose: Exercise is beneficial to quality of life after cancer treatment, yet few cancer survivors meet exercise guidelines. Our study sought to determine the feasibility of an oncology rehabilitation exercise program embedded within a cardiac rehabilitation program. Methods: Patients who rated their fatigue >4/10 after completion of adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer were screened for eligibility and the outcomes were assessed (Piper Fatigue Scale, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast [FACT-B], Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, body composition, stress test, and physical activity measurement [accelerometer]). Participants received individualized exercise prescription. Following the 16-week program, repeat assessment plus patient acceptance and satisfaction survey was completed. The primary end point was the composite of accrual rate >25%, program adherence >80%, and mean compliance with accelerometer use >80%. Results: Twenty of 24 screened patients consented to the study and completed the baseline assessment. Adherence was 30.3%. Mean accelerometer use was 3.88/7 days (78%). Fatigue at baseline was rated at 4.82/10, and at 3.59 (p = 0.09) after the intervention. Overall well-being (FACT-B) score changed from 92.7 to 98.3 (p = 0.05). There were no significant changes in body composition (except for bone mineral content), aerobic exercise capacity, or activity patterns. Conclusion: Although the primary outcome was not met, our study indicates that an oncology exercise rehabilitation program can be incorporated into an existing cardiac rehabilitation program. Based on feedback received, we propose that in order to achieve exercise goals, frequent, encouraging, and tailored feedback and group sessions to foster a sense of community may additionally be needed to strengthen adherence to a prescribed exercise program. Keywords: breast cancer rehabilitation, fatigue, exercise, community setting
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".