Patterns and influencing factors of exercise attendance of breast cancer patients during neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Performing 2-3 exercise sessions/week may relieve therapy-related side effects of breast cancer patients (BRCA) and improve their quality of life. However, attendance to the exercise sessions is often impaired. Thus, we investigated patterns and possible influencing factors of attendance to an aerobic (AT) or resistance training (RT) intervention in BRCA during neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: BRCA (N = 122) were randomly allocated to supervised AT or RT twice weekly during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (18 ± 4 weeks). Attendance was calculated individually and group-wise per training week as the percentage of the performed sessions out of the prescribed sessions. Possible influencing factors were investigated using multiple regression analyses. RESULTS: Mean individual attendance was 44.1% ± 29.3% with no significant differences between the groups. Group-wise attendance was highest in the first 6 weeks of training with ≥ 60% for AT and ≥ 50% for RT, but decreased over the course of the intervention accompanying chemotherapy. Significantly higher attendance was associated with not having vs. having nausea (ß = - 14.57; p = 0.007) and not having vs. having pain (ß = - 12.07; p = 0.12), whereas fatigue did not show any association (ß = - 0.006; p = 0.96). Having been randomized into a preferred intervention group (48.8%) showed no association with attendance. Yet, patients' rating of the exercise intervention as "good"/ "very good" (58.7%) was significantly associated with higher attendance (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: For both exercise interventions, group-wise attendance/training week decreased during chemotherapy despite good intervention ratings. While some patients never started, others trained almost constantly twice weekly. The study revealed that patients who are nauseous or experience pain may need more support to attend more exercise sessions. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02999074 from May 6, 2016.

Maintenance of Aerobic or Resistance Training After an Exercise Intervention Among Breast Cancer Patients After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Exercise interventions have been shown to be beneficial for cancer patients regarding various treatment-related side effects and quality of life. For sustainable effects, patients should continue the training. Therefore, we investigated the maintenance of an exercise training in breast cancer patients, reasons for (dis)continuation, and explored possible influencing factors. METHODS: The investigation is based on a 3-arm randomized intervention trial comparing aerobic and resistance training (19 [4]) during or after neoadjuvant chemotherapy among breast cancer patients. About 2 years after breast surgery, 68 patients (age 52 [11] y) provided information about training continuation, self-reported reasons of (dis)continuation, sociodemographics, employment status, age, and body mass index. Training continuation was investigated with Kaplan-Meier analyses. RESULTS: The intervention was rated as good or very good by 88.1% of participants. Nevertheless, 52.9% discontinued the training directly, but half of them changed to different types of exercise. Reasons for discontinuation included lack of time and long travel distance to the training facility. The median continuation was 19.0 months (Q1, Q3: 5.5, 36.0) with no statistically significant difference between the intervention groups. Younger, better educated, partnered patients tended toward longer training continuation. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients continued exercising after the end of intervention. However, a nonnegligible number discontinued training immediately or after few months. Practical, social, and financial support for a transition to an adequate training that is affordable and feasible in the patient's daily life might foster training maintenance. Especially patients who are less educated, elderly, or living alone may need more support to continue exercising.

Long-term effects of exercise interventions on physical activity in breast cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Benefits of exercise interventions for cancer patients are well established. This systematic review aimed to investigate the sustainability of exercise interventions with respect to physical activity behaviour of breast cancer patients in the longer term. METHODS: The databases Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating aerobic exercise, resistance exercise, or combined exercise interventions in breast cancer patients and assessing physical activity at least 2 months after the intervention. Random-effect models were used to calculate standardized mean differences (SMD). RESULTS: A total of 27 RCTs with 4120 participants were included in the review, of which 11 RCTs with 1545 participants had appropriate data for the meta-analyses. Physical activity was mainly self-reported, and most exercise interventions were supervised. Exercise interventions tended to show a moderate significant effect up to 6 months for moderate to vigorous physical activity (SMD [95% CI] = 0.39 [0.07, 0.70]) and small, non-significant effects on total physical activity at 6 months (SMD [95% CI] = 0.14 [- 0.00, 0.28]) and up to 60 months after the intervention (SMD = 0.29 [-0.31, 0.90]). Differences between intervention characteristics, such as supervised versus unsupervised, were inconclusive due to the small number of RCTs. CONCLUSIONS: The physical activity behaviour in breast cancer patients remained improved for several months beyond the end of exercise interventions, but effects were small to moderate and diminished over time. Future studies should clarify how to maintain a healthy level of physical activity after completion of an exercise intervention.

Late effects, long-term problems and unmet needs of cancer survivors.

Great efforts are being made in cancer treatment, with impressive improvement in survival. The situation concerning research and care for long-term problems and late effects in the growing population of cancer survivors, however, is unsatisfactory. Therefore, in the FiX survey 1348 disease-free survivors about 4 years after diagnosis of different cancer types were asked to rate existing burdens and support received for them along a list of 36 potential problems. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed with the EORTC QLQ-C30. Determinants of burdens were explored using logistic regression analysis. While cancer survivors' global HRQoL, physical and role function ratings were comparable or better than age- and sex-matched reference values of the general population, emotional and cognitive function was worse, especially among women (P < .01). Most frequently reported problems with at least moderate burden were loss of physical performance (36.3%), fatigue (35.1%), sexual problems (34.7%), sleep problems (34.1%), arthralgia (33.8%), anxiety (28.0%), neuropathy (25.6%), memory problems (23.0%) and concentration problems (21.9%). Burdened survivors often rated received support as poor, especially regarding support for problems that physicians might consider medically nonthreatening, or for which no effective pharmacologic or medical treatment is known. Determinants for burden included higher age, female gender, having ever received chemotherapy and overweight/obesity. In conclusion, a significant number of cancer survivors suffer from long-term or late effects and have unmet care needs. Awareness of health care professionals should be increased for these issues. The results of our study can contribute to the development of targeted survivorship plans.