Economic evaluation of exercise interventions for individuals with cancer: A systematic review.

While there is good evidence that exercise is an effective adjunct therapy to cancer care, little is known about its value for money. The aim of this systematic review is to explore the available evidence pertaining to the cost-effectiveness of exercise interventions following cancer. A search of eight online databases (CINAHL, the Cochrane Library (NHSEED), Econlit, Embase, PsycInfo, PubMed, Scopus, Web of science) was first conducted on 26 March 2021 and updated on 8 March 2022. Only economic evaluations with results in the form of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were included. The Consolidated Health Economics Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) was used to appraise the quality of reporting in the studies. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO. Sixteen studies comprising seven (44%) cost-utility analyses (CUA), one (6%) cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) and eight (50%) combined CUA and CEA were identified. These studies explored exercise in five cancer types (breast, colon, lung, prostate, and blood), with half (50%) in breast cancer. Seven studies (44%) adopted societal perspectives. Exercise interventions were found to be cost-effective in five of ten (50%) trial-based economic evaluations and in five of the six (83%) model-based economic evaluations. Most exercise interventions included were supervised, while close supervision and individualized exercise sessions incurred higher costs. Exercise interventions in cancer care are cost-effective for various cancer types despite considerable heterogeneity in exercise delivery and the type of analysis used for economic evaluation. There is clear value in using decision-analytic modelling to account for the long-term benefits of exercise in cancer care.

Self-efficacy, motivation, and habits: psychological correlates of exercise among women with breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this analysis was to explore associations between exercise behaviour among breast cancer survivors and three behavioural constructs from distinct theories: self-efficacy from social cognitive theory, motivation from self-determination theory, and habits from habit theory. METHODS: Breast cancer survivors (n = 204) completed a cross-sectional survey that collected demographic and disease characteristics, exercise levels, and self-efficacy, motivation, and habits. Multivariable linear regression models were used to identify constructs associated with total activity and resistance training. RESULTS: Participants were a mean (SD) age of 57.3 (10.8) years and most were diagnosed with early-stage disease (72%) and engaged in sufficient levels of total activity (94%), though only 45% completed ≥ 2 resistance training sessions/week. Identified motivation (ꞵ[95% CI] = 7.6 [3.9-11.3]) and habits (ꞵ[95% CI] = 4.4 [1.4-7.4]) were significantly associated with total activity (as were body mass index and disease stage), whilst identified motivation (ꞵ[95% CI] = 0.6 [0.3-0.9]) and coping self-efficacy (ꞵ[95% CI] = 0.02 [< 0.01-0.03]) were significantly associated with resistance training. The models explained 27% and 16% of variance in total activity and resistance training behaviour, respectively. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that incorporating strategies that support identified motivation, habits, and coping self-efficacy in future interventions could promote increased exercise behaviour among breast cancer populations. Future longitudinal research should examine associations with exercise in a more representative, population-based sample.

Burden of lymphedema in long-term breast cancer survivors by race and age.

BACKGROUND: Risk assessment for breast cancer-related lymphedema has emphasized upper-limb symptoms and treatment-related risk factors. This article examined breast cancer-related lymphedema after surgery, overall and in association with broader demographic and clinical features. METHODS: The Carolina Breast Cancer Study phase 3 followed participants for breast cancer-related lymphedema from baseline (on average, 5 months after breast cancer diagnosis) to 7 years after diagnosis. Among 2645 participants, 552 self-reported lymphedema cases were identified. Time-to-lymphedema curves and inverse probability weighted conditional Cox proportional hazards model were used to evaluate whether demographics and clinical features were associated with breast cancer-related lymphedema. RESULTS: Point prevalence of breast cancer-related lymphedema was 6.8% at baseline, and 19.9% and 23.8% at 2 and 7 years after diagnosis, respectively. Most cases had lymphedema in the arm (88%-93%), whereas 14% to 27% presented in the trunk and/or breast. Beginning approximately 10 months after diagnosis, younger Black women had the highest risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema and older non-Black women had the lowest risk. Positive lymph node status, larger tumor size (>5 cm), and estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer, as well as established risk factors such as higher body mass index, removal of more than five lymph nodes, mastectomy, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy, were significantly associated with increased hazard (1.5- to 3.5-fold) of lymphedema. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight that hazard of breast cancer-related lymphedema differs by demographic characteristics and clinical features. These factors could be used to identify those at greatest need of lymphedema prevention and early intervention. LAY SUMMARY: In this study, the aim was to investigate breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) burden. This study found that risk of BCRL differs by race, age, and other characteristics.

Physical activity and exercise in adults diagnosed with primary brain cancer: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: The aims of this systematic review were to: (1) describe physical activity (PA) levels following diagnosis of primary brain cancer, (2) determine the relationship between PA levels and health outcomes, and (3) assess the effect of participating in an exercise intervention on health outcomes following a diagnosis of brain cancer. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and CINAHL were searched for relevant articles published prior to May 1, 2020. Studies reporting levels of PA, the relationship between PA and health outcomes, and exercise interventions conducted in adults with brain cancer were eligible. The search strategy included terms relating to primary brain cancer, physical activity, and exercise. Two independent reviewers assessed articles for eligibility and methodological quality (according to Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools). Descriptive statistics were used to present relevant data and outcomes. RESULTS: 15 studies were eligible for inclusion. Most adults with brain cancer were insufficiently active from diagnosis through to post-treatment. Higher levels of PA were associated with lower severity of brain cancer specific concerns and higher quality of life. Preliminary evidence suggests that exercise is safe, feasible and potentially beneficial to brain cancer symptom severity and interference, aerobic capacity, body composition and PA levels. However, the level of evidence to support these findings is graded as weak. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence suggests that it is likely appropriate to promote those with brain cancer to be as physically active as possible. The need or ability of those with brain cancer to meet current PA guidelines promoted to all people with cancer remains unclear.

Effects of football fitness training on lymphedema and upper-extremity function in women after treatment for breast cancer: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer survivors are encouraged to be physically active. A recent review suggests that football training is an effective exercise modality for women across the lifespan, positively influencing health variables such as strength, fitness and social well-being. However, football is a contact sport, potentially posing an increased risk of trauma-related injury. Against this backdrop, breast cancer survivors are advised to avoid trauma or injury to the affected or at-risk arm in order to protect against lymphedema onset or exacerbation. The aim of this study was therefore to evaluate the feasibility and safety of Football Fitness training in relation to lymphedema and upper-extremity function after treatment for breast cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-eight women aged 18-75 years, who had received surgery for stage I-III breast cancer and completed (neo) adjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy within five years, were randomized (2:1) to a Football Fitness group (FFG, n = 46) or a control group (CON, n = 22) for twelve months. Secondary analyses using linear mixed models were performed to assess changes in upper-body morbidity, specifically arm lymphedema (inter-arm volume % difference, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry; extracellular fluid (L-Dex), bioimpedance spectroscopy), self-reported breast and arm symptoms (EORTC breast cancer-specific questionnaire (BR23) and upper-extremity function (DASH questionnaire) at baseline, six- and twelve-month follow-up. RESULTS: We observed similar point prevalent cases of lymphedema between groups at all time points, irrespective of measurement method. At the six-month post-baseline assessment, reductions in L-Dex (extracellular fluid) were found in FFG versus CON. These significant findings were not maintained at the twelve-month assessment. No difference between groups was observed for inter-limb volume difference %, nor any of the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSION: While superiority of Football Fitness was not observed, the results support that participation in Football Fitness training is feasible and suggests no negative effects on breast cancer-specific upper-body morbidity, including lymphedema. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT03284567.

A phase III randomized clinical trial comparing sentinel node biopsy with no retroperitoneal node dissection in apparent early-stage endometrial cancer - ENDO-3: ANZGOG trial 1911/2020.

BACKGROUND: Sentinel node biopsy is a surgical technique to explore lymph nodes for surgical staging of endometrial cancer, which has replaced full retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. However, the effectiveness of sentinel node biopsy, its value to patients, and potential harms compared with no-node dissection have never been shown in a randomized trial. PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: Stage 1 will test recovery from surgery. Stage 2 will compare disease-free survival at 4.5 years between patients randomized to sentinel node biopsy versus no retroperitoneal node dissection. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: The primary hypothesis for stage 1 is that treatment with sentinel node biopsy will not cause detriment to patient outcomes (lymphedema, morbidity, loss of quality of life) and will not increase treatment-related morbidity or health services costs compared with patients treated without a retroperitoneal node dissection at 12 months after surgery. The primary hypothesis for stage 2 is that disease-free survival at 4.5 years after surgery in patients without retroperitoneal node dissection is not inferior to those receiving sentinel node biopsy. TRIAL DESIGN: This phase III, open-label, two-arm, multistage, randomized non-inferiority trial (ENDO-3) will determine the value of sentinel node biopsy for surgical management of endometrial cancer. Patients with endometrial cancer are randomized to receive: (1) laparoscopic/robotic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy with sentinel node biopsy or (2) laparoscopic/robotic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy without retroperitoneal node dissection. In stage 1, 444 patients will be enrolled to demonstrate feasibility and quality of life. If this is demonstrated, we will enroll another 316 patients in stage 2. MAJOR INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria include women aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed endometrial cancer; clinical stage 1, who meet the criteria for laparoscopic or robotic total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Patients with uterine mesenchymal tumors are excluded. PRIMARY ENDPOINTS: The endpoint for stage 1 is surgical recovery, with the proportion of patients returning to usual daily activities at 3 months post-surgery as measured with the EQ-5D. Stage 2 is disease-free survival at 4.5 years. SAMPLE SIZE: 760 participants (both stages). ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: Stage 1 commenced in January 2021 and is planned to be completed in December 2024 when 444 participants have completed 12 months' follow-up. Stage 2 will enroll a further 316 participants for a total of 760 patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04073706.

Translating research into practice: outcomes from the Healthy Living after Cancer partnership project.

BACKGROUND: Healthy Living after Cancer (HLaC) was a national dissemination and implementation study of an evidence-based lifestyle intervention for cancer survivors. The program was imbedded into existing telephone cancer information and support services delivered by Australian state-based Cancer Councils (CC). We report here the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance of the program. METHODS: In this phase IV study (single-group, pre-post design) participants - survivors of any type of cancer, following treatment with curative intent - received up to 12 nurse/allied health professional-led telephone health coaching calls over 6 months. Intervention delivery was grounded in motivational interviewing, with emphasis on evidence-based behaviour change strategies. Using the RE-AIM evaluation framework, primary outcomes were reach, indicators of program adoption, implementation, costs and maintenance. Secondary (effectiveness) outcomes were participant-reported anthropometric, behavioural and psychosocial variables including: weight; physical activity; dietary intake; quality-of-life; treatment side-effects; distress; and fear of cancer recurrence and participant satisfaction. Changes were evaluated using linear mixed models, including terms for timepoint (0/6 months), strata (Cancer Council), and timepoint x strata. RESULTS: Four of 5 CCs approached participated in the study. In total, 1183 cancer survivors were referred (mostly via calls to the Cancer Council telephone information service). Of these, 90.4% were eligible and 88.7% (n = 791) of those eligible consented to participate. Retention rate was 63.4%. Participants were mostly female (88%), aged 57 years and were overweight (BMI = 28.8 ± 6.5 kg/m2). Improvements in all participant-reported outcomes (standardised effect sizes of 0.1 to 0.6) were observed (p < 0.001). The program delivery costs were on average AU$427 (US$296) per referred cancer survivor. CONCLUSIONS: This telephone-delivered lifestyle intervention, which was feasibly implemented by Cancer Councils, led to meaningful and statistically significant improvements in cancer survivors' health and quality-of-life at a relatively low cost. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) - ACTRN12615000882527 (registered on 24/08/2015).

Physical activity and exercise in women with ovarian cancer: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: A consistent body of evidence supports participating in physical activity (PA) post-cancer diagnosis as beneficial to function, quality-of-life and potentially survival. However, diagnosis of late stage disease, poor prognosis, receipt of high doses of adjuvant therapy and presence of severe acute and persistent treatment-related side-effects may alter how these findings translate to women with ovarian cancer. Therefore, the objectives of this review were to (I) describe PA levels post-diagnosis of ovarian cancer, (II) explore the relationship between PA levels and health outcomes, and (III) evaluate the effect of exercise interventions for women with ovarian cancer. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and CINAHL were systematically searched to December 31, 2019. Two independent reviewers assessed articles for eligibility. Studies were eligible if they evaluated the relationship between PA levels or an exercise intervention and health outcomes following ovarian cancer. Methodological quality was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools. Descriptive statistics were used to collate relevant data. RESULTS: 34 articles were eligible for inclusion. Results demonstrated that most women decrease PA from pre- to post-diagnosis and remain insufficiently active following diagnosis. Higher levels of PA were associated with higher health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL), and lower levels of anxiety and depression. Exercise appears safe and feasible during and following treatment and leads to improvements in HRQOL, fatigue and additional physical and psychological outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that PA is relevant to health outcomes for women with ovarian cancer. Interventions that aid women to stay or become sufficiently active, including through exercise interventions during or following treatment have potential to improve the lives of those with ovarian cancer. Future work evaluating targeted interventions that can accommodate disease-specific challenges is now required to ensure scientific findings can translate into improved ovarian cancer care.

Incidence and risk factors for lower limb lymphedema associated with endometrial cancer: Results from a prospective, longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the incidence and risk factors for lower limb lymphedema (LLL) associated with endometrial cancer is limited. Our objective was to use data from a prospective, longitudinal gynecological cancer cohort study to determine LLL incidence up to 24 months post-diagnosis of endometrial cancer and to explore the relationship between personal and treatment-related factors and risk of developing LLL. METHODS: Women recently diagnosed with endometrial cancer (n = 235) were evaluated at regular intervals post-diagnosis (up to 3-monthly) using bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) and self-reported leg swelling (SRLS). RESULTS: Incidence of LLL at 24 months post-diagnosis was 33% and 45% according to BIS and SRLS, respectively. When analyses were restricted to obese women, incidence at 24 months post-diagnosis increased to 67% (BIS) and 54% (SRLS). Following adjusted analyses, higher body mass index was associated with higher odds of baseline lymphedema (BIS: OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.47-2.49, p < .01; SRLS: OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00-1.12, p < .01) and LLL incidence by 24 months post-diagnosis (BIS: OR 1.29, 95% CI: 0.99-1.68, p = .055; SRLS: OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.11, p = .008). According to SRLS, presence of comorbidities was also associated with baseline lymphedema (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.15-1.78, p = .001), and more extensive lymph node dissection (OR 1.06, 95% CI: 1.01-1.12, p = .026) and receipt of chemotherapy (OR: 2.65, 95% CI: 1.12-6.29, p = .027) were identified as risk factors for lymphedema incidence. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that LLL following endometrial cancer is common, particularly in women with high body mass index, or comorbidities, and those requiring more extensive lymph node dissection or chemotherapy. Future studies should examine the potential of weight loss intervention as a strategy to reduce LLL incidence.

Exercise and colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of exercise safety, feasibility and effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis evaluated the safety, feasibility and effect of exercise among individuals with colorectal cancer. METHODS: A database search (CINAHL, Ebscohost, MEDLINE, Pubmed, ProQuest Health and Medical Complete, ProQuest Nursing, Science Direct) for randomised, controlled, exercise trials involving individuals with colorectal cancer, published before January 1, 2020 was undertaken. Safety (adverse events), feasibility (withdrawal and adherence rates) and effect data (health outcomes including quality of life, QoL) were abstracted. Risk difference (RD) and standardised mean differences (SMD) were calculated to compare safety and effects between exercise and usual care (UC). Subgroup analyses were conducted to assess whether outcomes differed by exercise mode, duration, supervision and treatment. Risk of bias was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database tool. RESULTS: For the 19 trials included, there was no difference in adverse event risk between exercise and UC (RD = 0.00; 95% CI:-0.01, 0.01, p = 0.92). Median withdrawal rate was 12% (0-22%) and adherence was 86% (42-91%). Significant effects of exercise compared to UC were observed for QoL, fatigue, aerobic fitness, upper-body strength, depression, sleep and reduced body fat (SMD = 0.21-0.66, p < 0.05). Subgroup analyses suggested larger benefits (p < 0.05) for QoL and fatigue for supervised interventions; for QoL, aerobic fitness and reduced body fat for ≥12-week interventions; and for aerobic fitness when interventions were during chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Although reporting of safety and compliance data was lacking in most trials, findings support that exercise is safe and feasible in colorectal cancer. Further, participation in mixed-mode exercise, including unsupervised exercise, leads to improvements in various health-related outcomes.

Heavy-load resistance exercise during chemotherapy in physically inactive breast cancer survivors at risk for lymphedema: a randomized trial.

Background: Due to long-standing concerns that heavy-load lifting could increase the risk of developing lymphedema, breast cancer survivors have been advised to refrain from resistance exercise with heavy loads. This study prospectively evaluated the effect of heavy-load resistance exercise on lymphedema development in women receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer.Material and Methods: Physically inactive women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer (n = 153) were randomized to a HIGH (supervised, multimodal exercise including heavy-load resistance exercise: 85-90% 1 repetition maximum [RM], three sets of 5-8 repetitions) versus LOW (pedometer and one-on-one consultations) 12-week intervention. Outcomes (baseline, 12 and 39 weeks) included lymphedema status (extracellular fluid [bioimpedance spectroscopy] and inter-arm volume % difference [dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry], lymphedema symptoms [numeric rating scale 0-10]), upper-extremity strength (1 RM), and quality of life domains (EORTC- BR23). Linear mixed models were used to evaluate equivalence between groups for lymphedema outcomes (equivalence margins for L-Dex, % difference and symptoms scale: ±5, ±3% and ±1, respectively). Superiority analysis was conducted for muscle strength and quality of life domains.Results: Postintervention equivalence between groups was found for extracellular fluid (0.4; 90% CI -2.5 to 3.2) and symptoms of heaviness (-0.2; -0.6 to 0.2), tightness (-0.1; -0.8 to 0.6) and swelling (0.2; -0.4 to 0.8). Nonequivalence was found for inter-arm volume % difference (-3.5%; -17.3 to 10.3) and pain (-0.7; -1.3 to 0), favoring HIGH. Strength gains were superior in the HIGH versus LOW group (3 kg; 1 to 5, p < .05). Further, clinically relevant reductions in breast (-11; -15 to -7) and arm (-6; -10 to -1) symptoms were found in the HIGH group.Conclusion: Findings suggest that physically inactive breast cancer survivors can benefit from supervised heavy-load resistance exercise during chemotherapy without increasing lymphedema risk. Trial registration: ISRCTN13816000.

Effects and moderators of exercise on muscle strength, muscle function and aerobic fitness in patients with cancer: a meta-analysis of individual patient data.

OBJECTIVE: To optimally target exercise interventions for patients with cancer, it is important to identify which patients benefit from which interventions. DESIGN: We conducted an individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate demographic, clinical, intervention-related and exercise-related moderators of exercise intervention effects on physical fitness in patients with cancer. DATA SOURCES: We identified relevant studies via systematic searches in electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We analysed data from 28 randomised controlled trials investigating the effects of exercise on upper body muscle strength (UBMS) and lower body muscle strength (LBMS), lower body muscle function (LBMF) and aerobic fitness in adult patients with cancer. RESULTS: Exercise significantly improved UBMS (ß=0.20, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.14 to 0.26), LBMS (ß=0.29, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.35), LBMF (ß=0.16, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.24) and aerobic fitness (ß=0.28, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.34), with larger effects for supervised interventions. Exercise effects on UBMS were larger during treatment, when supervised interventions included ≥3 sessions per week, when resistance exercises were included and when session duration was >60 min. Exercise effects on LBMS were larger for patients who were living alone, for supervised interventions including resistance exercise and when session duration was >60 min. Exercise effects on aerobic fitness were larger for younger patients and when supervised interventions included aerobic exercise. CONCLUSION: Exercise interventions during and following cancer treatment had small effects on UBMS, LBMS, LBMF and aerobic fitness. Demographic, intervention-related and exercise-related characteristics including age, marital status, intervention timing, delivery mode and frequency and type and time of exercise sessions moderated the exercise effect on UBMS, LBMS and aerobic fitness.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Safety, Feasibility, and Effect of Exercise in Women With Stage II+ Breast Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the safety, feasibility, and effect of exercise among women with stage II+ breast cancer. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, Cochrane, Ebscohost, MEDLINE, Pubmed, ProQuest Health and Medical Complete, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Source, Science Direct and SPORTDiscus were searched for articles published before March 1, 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized, controlled, exercise trials involving at least 50% of women diagnosed with stage II+ breast cancer were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Risk of bias was assessed and adverse event severity was classified using the Common Terminology Criteria. Feasibility was evaluated by computing median (range) recruitment, withdrawal, and adherence rates. Meta-analyses were performed to evaluate exercise safety and effects on health outcomes only. The influence of intervention characteristics (mode, supervision, duration and timing) on exercise outcomes were also explored. DATA SYNTHESIS: There were no differences in adverse events between exercise and usual care (risk difference: <0.01 ([95% CI: -0.01, 0.01], P=0.38). Median recruitment rate was 56% (1%-96%), withdrawal rate was 10% (0%-41%) and adherence rate was 82% (44%-99%). Safety and feasibility outcomes were similar, irrespective of exercise mode, supervision, duration, or timing. Effects of exercise for quality of life, fitness, fatigue, strength, anxiety, depression, body mass index and waist circumference compared with usual care were significant (standardized mean difference range: 0.17-0.77, P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The findings support the safety, feasibility, and effects of exercise for those with stage II+ breast cancer, suggesting that national and international exercise guidelines appear generalizable to women with local, regional, and distant breast cancer.

Lymphedema following gynecological cancer: Results from a prospective, longitudinal cohort study on prevalence, incidence and risk factors.

OBJECTIVE: Cancer-related lymphedema is a debilitating condition that adversely influences function, health and quality of life. The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence, incidence, and risk factors of lower-limb lymphedema pre- through to 24months post-surgery for gynecological cancer. METHODS: A clinic-based sample of women (n=408) with gynecological cancer participated in a prospective, longitudinal study (2008-2011) using self-reported measures (swelling in one or both legs) and objectively measured lymphedema (bioimpedance spectroscopy) at baseline (pre-surgery), six weeks-three months, 6-12months, and 15-24months post-surgery. RESULTS: At pre-surgery, 15% of women self-reported lymphedema and 27% had measurable evidence of lymphedema. By 24months post-surgery, incidence of new self-reported or measured lymphedema was 45% and 37%, respectively. Three-quarters of these new cases presented by 12-months post-treatment. While lymphedema was transient for some women, 60% had persistent lymphedema. More extensive lymph node dissection, receipt of chemotherapy and radiation therapy, increasing body mass index, insufficient levels of physical activity, diagnosis of vulvar/vaginal cancer and presence of pre-treatment lymphedema were identified as potential risk factors (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Findings support the need for integration of pre-surgical assessment, and prospective, post-treatment surveillance of lymphedema into gynecological cancer care. Future research exploring the role of maintaining healthy body weight, regular physical activity and education about early detection of lymphedema to improve gynecological cancer survivorship is warranted.

Cost-effectiveness of a pragmatic exercise intervention for women with breast cancer: results from a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To report on the cost-effectiveness of the Exercise for Health trial, comparing an exercise intervention with usual care during and following treatment for women with breast cancer. METHODS: Women with breast cancer were randomized to an 8-month exercise intervention (involving regular contact with an exercise physiologist over the phone, n = 67, or home delivered face to face, n = 67) or usual care (n = 60) group and were assessed pre-intervention (5 weeks post-surgery), mid-intervention (6 months post-surgery), and 10 weeks post-intervention (12 months post-surgery). The benefit measures were "number of improvers" in quality of life (FACT-B+4) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Data on provider, patient, and government costs were used to consider 2 cost scenarios: (1) a service provider model and (2) a private model. RESULTS: There were 69 improvers in the intervention group compared with 21 in the usual care group (odds ratio 2.09, 95% confidence interval 1.08, 4.01; P = .033). The incremental cost per improver was A$2282 to A$2644. Quality-adjusted life years gain for the intervention group versus the usual care group was 0.009, with incremental cost per QALY gain for models 1 and 2 being A$105 231 and A$90 842, respectively. However, sensitivity analyses indicate that incremental cost per QALY gained was volatile to EuroQol-5D-3L weights. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that a pragmatic exercise intervention yields more women with markedly improved quality of life after breast cancer than usual care and may be cost-effective. The results are less certain in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life years; however, this may be an inappropriate measure for reflecting exercise benefit for women with breast cancer.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Exercise for Those With Cancer-Related Lymphedema.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of exercise on cancer-related lymphedema and related symptoms, and to determine the need for those with lymphedema to wear compression during exercise. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, Cochrane, EBSCOhost, MEDLINE, PubMed, ProQuest Health and Medical Complete, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Source, ScienceDirect, and SPORTDiscus databases were searched for trials published before January 1, 2015. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials and single-group pre-post studies published in English were included. Twenty-one (exercise) and 4 (compression and exercise) studies met inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted into tabular format using predefined data fields by 1 reviewer and assessed for accuracy by a second reviewer. Study quality was evaluated using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data were pooled using a random-effects model to assess the effects of acute and long-term exercise on lymphedema and lymphedema-associated symptoms, with subgroup analyses for exercise mode and intervention length. There was no effect of exercise (acute or intervention) on lymphedema or associated symptoms, with standardized mean differences from all analyses ranging between -0.2 and 0.1 (P values ≥.22). Findings from subgroup analyses for exercise mode (aerobic, resistance, mixed, other) and intervention duration (>12wk or ≤12wk) were consistent with these findings-that is, no effect on lymphedema or associated symptoms. There were too few studies evaluating the effect of compression during regular exercise to conduct a meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with secondary lymphedema can safely participate in progressive, regular exercise without experiencing a worsening of lymphedema or related symptoms. However, there is insufficient evidence to support or refute the current clinical recommendation to wear compression garments during regular exercise.

Weight and weight change following breast cancer: evidence from a prospective, population-based, breast cancer cohort study.

BACKGROUND: While weight gain following breast cancer is considered common, results supporting these findings are dated. This work describes changes in body weight following breast cancer over 72 months, compares weight with normative data and explores whether weight changes over time are associated with personal, diagnostic, treatment or behavioral characteristics. METHODS: A population-based sample of 287 Australian women diagnosed with early-stage invasive breast cancer was assessed prospectively at six, 12, 18 and 72 months post-surgery. Weight was clinically measured and linear mixed models were used to explore associations between weight and participant characteristics (collected via self-administered questionnaire). Those with BMI changes of one or more units were considered to have experienced clinically significant changes in weight. RESULTS: More than half (57%) of participants were overweight or obese at 6 months post-surgery, and by 72 months post-surgery 68% of women were overweight or obese. Among those who gained more weight than age-matched norms, clinically significant weight gain between 6 and 18 months and 6 and 72 months post-surgery was observed in 24% and 39% of participants, respectively (median [range] weight gain: 3.9 kg [2.0-11.3 kg] and 5.2 kg [0.6-28.7], respectively). Clinically-significant weight losses were observed in up to 24% of the sample (median [range] weight loss between 6 and 72 months post-surgery: -6.4 kg [-1.9--24.6 kg]). More extensive lymph node removal, being treated on the non-dominant side, receiving radiation therapy and lower physical activity levels at 6 months was associated with higher body weights post-breast cancer (group differences >3 kg; all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: While average weight gain among breast cancer survivors in the long-term is small, subgroups of women experience greater gains linked with adverse health and above that experienced by age-matched counterparts. Weight change post-breast cancer is a contemporary public health issue and the integration of healthy weight education and support into standard breast cancer care has potential to significantly improve the length and quality of cancer survivorship.

Healthy Living after Cancer: a dissemination and implementation study evaluating a telephone-delivered healthy lifestyle program for cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Given evidence shows physical activity, a healthful diet and weight management can improve cancer outcomes and reduce chronic disease risk, the major cancer organisations and health authorities have endorsed related guidelines for cancer survivors. Despite these, and a growing evidence base on effective lifestyle interventions, there is limited uptake into survivorship care. METHODS/DESIGN: Healthy Living after Cancer (HLaC) is a national dissemination and implementation study that will evaluate the integration of an evidence-based lifestyle intervention for cancer survivors into an existing telephone cancer information and support service delivered by Australian state-based Cancer Councils. Eligible participants (adults having completed cancer treatment with curative intent) will receive 12 health coaching calls over 6 months from Cancer Council nurses/allied health professionals targeting national guidelines for physical activity, healthy eating and weight control. Using the RE-AIM evaluation framework, primary outcomes are service-level indicators of program reach, adoption, implementation/costs and maintenance, with secondary (effectiveness) outcomes of patient-reported anthropometric, behavioural and psychosocial variables collected at pre- and post-program completion. The total participant accrual target across four participating Cancer Councils is 900 over 3 years. DISCUSSION: The national scope of the project and broad inclusion of cancer survivors, alongside evaluation of service-level indicators, associated costs and patient-reported outcomes, will provide the necessary practice-based evidence needed to inform future allocation of resources to support healthy living among cancer survivors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR)--ACTRN12615000882527 (registered on 24/08/2015).

Adverse breast cancer treatment effects: the economic case for making rehabilitative programs standard of care.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this work was to evaluate the patient-borne financial cost of common, adverse breast cancer treatment-associated effects, comparing cost across women with or without these side effects. METHODS: Two hundred eighty-seven Australian women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer were prospectively followed starting at 6 months post-surgery for 12 months, with three monthly assessments of detailed treatment-related side effects and their direct and indirect patient costs attributable to breast cancer. Bootstrapping statistics were used to analyze cost data, and adjusted logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between costs and adverse events from breast cancer. Costs were inflated and converted from 2002 Australian to 2014 US dollars. RESULTS: More than 90 % of women experienced at least one adverse effect (i.e., post-surgical issue, reaction to radiotherapy, upper-body symptoms or reduced function, lymphedema, fatigue, or weight gain). On average, women paid $5,636 (95 % confidence interval (CI), $4,694, $6,577) in total costs. Women with any one of the following symptoms (fatigue, reduced upper-body function, upper-body symptoms) or women who report ≥4 adverse treatment-related effects, have 1.5 to nearly 4 times the odds of having higher healthcare costs than women who do not report these complaints (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Women face substantial economic burden due to a range of treatment-related health problems, which may persist beyond the treatment period. Improving breast cancer care by incorporating prospective surveillance of treatment-related side effects and strategies for prevention and treatment of concerns (e.g., exercise) has real potential for reducing patient-borne costs.