Article

Random control clinical trial on the effects of aerobic exercise training on erythrocyte levels during radiation treatment for breast cancer

Cancer (Impact Factor: 5.2). 10/2006; 107(10):2490 - 2495. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.22267
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND.Erythrocyte changes from aerobic exercise training were examined during radiation treatment of breast cancer.METHODS.Twenty sedentary females with breast carcinoma who were ages 35 to 65 years were randomized to aerobic exercise (AE) of walking for 20 to 45 minutes, 3 to 5 times per week, at 50% to 70% of measured maximum heart rates or to placebo stretching (PS) activities 3 to 5 days per week during 7 weeks of radiation treatment. Measures were obtained 1 week before and after the radiation regimen. Serum blood analyses, through complete blood counts, measured red blood cell counts (RBC), hematocrit (HCT), and hemoglobin (HB). Peak aerobic capacity (peak VO2) was measured by exercise testing with oxygen uptake analysis to assess training. A Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney U test examined changes between groups (P ≤ .05 for significance).RESULTS.AE peak VO2 increased by 6.3% (P = .001) and PS decreased by 4.6% (P = .083). RBC increased in AE from 4.10 to 4.21 million cells/μL and declined in PS from 4.30 to 4.19 million cells/μL; the between-group differences were significant (P = .014). HCT increased in AE from 38.0% to 38.8% and declined in PS from 37.40% to 36.50%; the between-group differences were significant (P = .046). HB increased in AE from 12.3 to 12.4 g/dL and declined in PS from 12.25 to 11.77 g/dL; the between-group differences were significant (P = .009).CONCLUSIONS.The results of the current study suggest that moderate intensity aerobic exercise appears to maintain erythrocyte levels during radiation treatment of breast cancer compared with the declines observed in nontraining individuals. These findings suggest a safe, economical method to improve fitness and maintain erythrocytes in women during radiation treatment of breast cancer. Cancer 2006. © 2006 American Cancer Society.

1 Bookmark
 · 
47 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chemotherapy for lung cancer can have a detrimental effect on white blood cell (WBC) and red blood cell (RBC) counts. Physical exercise may have a role in improving WBCs and RBCs, although few studies have examined cancer patients receiving adjuvant therapies. The purpose of this pilot trial was to examine the effects of an exercise intervention utilizing resistance bands on WBCs and RBCs in lung cancer patients receiving curative intent chemotherapy. A sample of lung cancer patients scheduled for curative intent chemotherapy was randomly assigned to the exercise intervention (EX) condition or usual care (UC) condition. The EX condition participated in a three times weekly exercise program using resistance bands for the duration of chemotherapy. A total of 14 lung cancer patients completed the trial. EX condition participants completed 79% of planned exercise sessions. The EX condition was able to maintain WBCs over the course of the intervention compared to declines in the UC condition (p = .008; d = 1.68). There were no significant differences in change scores in RBCs. Exercise with resistance bands may help attenuate declines in WBCs in lung cancer patients receiving curative intent chemotherapy. Larger trials are warranted to validate these findings. Ultimately these findings could be informative for the development of supportive care strategies for lung cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Clinical Trials Registration #: NCT01130714.
    SpringerPlus 01/2014; 3:15.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cancer treatment is associated with decreased hemoglobin (Hb) concentration and aerobic fitness (VO2 max), which may contribute to cancer-related fatigue (CRF) and decreased quality of life (QoL). Endurance exercise may attenuate CRF and improve QoL, but the mechanisms have not been thoroughly investigated. Objectives. To (a) determine the feasibility of conducting an exercise intervention among women receiving treatment for breast cancer; (b) examine the effects of exercise on Hb and VO2 max and determine their association with changes in CRF and QoL; and (c) investigate changes in selected inflammatory markers. Methods. Fourteen women receiving chemotherapy for Stages I-II breast cancer were randomly assigned to exercise (n = 7) or usual care (n = 7). Women in the exercise group performed supervised, individualized treadmill exercise 2-3 times/week for the duration of chemotherapy (9-12 weeks). Data were collected 4 times over 15-16 weeks. Results. Recruitment rate was 45.7%. Sixteen women consented and 14 completed the trial, for a retention rate of 87.5%. Adherence to exercise protocol was 95-97%, and completion of data collection was 87.5-100%. Exercise was well tolerated. VO2 max was maintained at prechemotherapy levels in exercisers but declined in the usual-care group (p < .05). Hb decreased (p < .001) in all participants as they progressed through chemotherapy. Exercise did not have significant effects on CRF or QoL. Changes in inflammatory markers favored the exercise group. Conclusions. Exercise during chemotherapy may protect against chemotherapy-induced decline in VO2 max but not Hb concentration. © The Author(s) 2014.
    Biological Research for Nursing 01/2015; 17(1):40-8. · 1.34 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The beneficial effects of regular exercise for people living with or beyond cancer are becoming apparent. However, how to promote exercise behaviour in sedentary cancer cohorts is not as well understood. A large majority of people living with or recovering from cancer do not meet exercise recommendations. Hence, reviewing the evidence on how to promote and sustain exercise behaviour is important. To assess the effects of interventions to promote exercise behaviour in sedentary people living with and beyond cancer and to address the following questions: Which interventions are most effective in improving aerobic fitness and skeletal muscle strength and endurance? What adverse effects are attributed to different exercise interventions? Which interventions are most effective in improving exercise behaviour amongst patients with different cancers? Which interventions are most likely to promote long-term (12 months or longer) exercise behaviour? What frequency of contact with exercise professionals is associated with increased exercise behaviour? What theoretical basis is most often associated with increased exercise behaviour? What behaviour change techniques are most often associated with increased exercise behaviour? We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 8, 2012), MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, PsycLIT/PsycINFO, SportDiscus and PEDro from inception to August 2012. We also searched the grey literature, wrote to leading experts in the field, wrote to charities and searched reference lists of other recent systematic reviews. We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared an exercise intervention with a usual care approach in sedentary people over the age of 18 with a homogenous primary cancer diagnosis. Two review authors working independently (LB and KH) screened all titles and abstracts to identify studies that might meet the inclusion criteria, or that cannot be safely excluded without assessment of the full text (e.g. when no abstract is available). All eligible papers were formally abstracted by at least two members of the review author team working independently (LB and KH) and using the data collection form. When possible, and if appropriate, we performed a fixed-effect meta-analysis of study outcomes. For continuous outcomes (e.g. cardiorespiratory fitness), we extracted the final value, the standard deviation of the outcome of interest and the number of participants assessed at follow-up in each treatment arm, to estimate standardised mean difference (SMD) between treatment arms. SMD was used, as investigators used heterogeneous methods to assess individual outcomes. If a meta-analysis was not possible or was not appropriate, we synthesised studies as a narrative. Fourteen trials were included in this review, involving a total of 648 participants. Only studies involving breast, prostate or colorectal cancer were identified as eligible. Just six trials incorporated a target level of exercise that could meet current recommendations. Only three trials were identified that attempted to objectively validate independent exercise behaviour with accelerometers or heart rate monitoring. Adherence to exercise interventions, which is crucial for understanding treatment dose, is often poorly reported. It is important to note that the fundamental metrics of exercise behaviour (i.e. frequency, intensity and duration, repetitions, sets and intensity of resistance training), although easy to devise and report, are seldom included in published clinical trials.None of the included trials reported that 75% or greater adherence (the stated primary outcome for this review) of the intervention group met current aerobic exercise recommendations at any given follow-up. Just two trials reported six weeks of resistance exercise behaviour that would meet the guideline recommendations. However, three trials reported adherence of 75% or greater to an aerobic exercise goal that was less than the current guideline recommendation of 150 minutes per week. All three incorporated both supervised and independent exercise components as part of the intervention, and none placed restrictions on the control group in terms of exercise behaviour. These three trials shared programme set goals and the following behaviour change techniques: generalisation of a target behaviour; prompting of self-monitoring of behaviour; and prompting of practise. Despite the uncertainty surrounding adherence in many of the included trials, interventions caused improvements in aerobic exercise tolerance at 8 to 12 weeks (from 7 studies, SMD 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 0.95) in intervention participants compared with controls. At six months, aerobic exercise tolerance was also improved (from 5 studies, SMD 0.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.94), but it should be noted that four of the five trials used in this analysis had a high risk of bias, hence caution is warranted in interpretation of results. Attrition over the course of these interventions is typically low (median 6%). Interventions to promote exercise in cancer survivors who report better levels of adherence share some common behaviour change techniques. These involve setting programme goals, prompting practise and self-monitoring and encouraging participants to attempt to generalise behaviours learned in supervised exercise environments to other, non-supervised contexts. However, expecting most sedentary survivors to achieve current guideline recommendations of at least 150 minutes per week of aerobic exercise is likely to be unrealistic. As with all well-designed exercise programmes in any context, prescriptions should be designed around individual capabilities, and frequency, duration and intensity or sets, repetitions, intensity or resistance training should be generated on this basis.
    Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 09/2013; 9:CD010192. · 5.94 Impact Factor

Full-text (4 Sources)

Download
23 Downloads
Available from
May 21, 2014