Search

Purpose: All patients living with cancer, including those with metastatic cancer, are encouraged to be physically active. This paper examines the secondary endpoints of an aerobic exercise intervention for men with metastatic prostate cancer. Methods: ExPeCT (Exercise, Prostate Cancer and Circulating Tumour Cells), was a multi-centre randomised control trial with a 6-month aerobic exercise intervention arm or a standard care control arm. Exercise adherence data was collected via heart rate monitors. Quality of life (FACT-P) and physical activity (self-administered questionnaire) assessments were completed at baseline, at 3 months and at 6 months. Results: A total of 61 patients were included (69.4 ± 7.3 yr, body mass index 29.2 ± 5.8 kg/m2). The median time since diagnosis was 34 months (IQR 7–54). A total of 35 (55%) of participants had > 1 region affected by metastatic disease. No adverse events were reported by participants. There was no effect of exercise on quality of life (Cohen’s d = − 0.082). Overall adherence to the supervised sessions was 83% (329 out of 396 possible sessions attended by participants). Overall adherence to the non-supervised home exercise sessions was 72% (months 1–3) and 67% (months 3–6). Modelling results for overall physical activity scores showed no significant main effect for the group (p-value = 0.25) or for time (p-value = 0.24). Conclusion: In a group of patients with a high burden of metastatic prostate cancer, a 6-month aerobic exercise intervention did not lead to change in quality of life. Further exercise studies examining the role of exercise for people living with metastatic prostate cancer are needed. Trial Registration: The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02453139) on May 25th 2015. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Existing research indicates that physical activity (PA) is beneficial to men with prostate cancer (PCa). We examined the potential of a single-contact peer-support-based behavioural intervention to promote PA engagement in men treated for PCa. Methods: A mixed methods design was employed, comprising a two-arm pragmatic trial and semi-structured interviews. The intervention was a 10-min PA-based presentation by a former patient, delivered in group seminars that are provided for patients as standard care. Seminars were alternately allocated to (a) cancer exercise specialist talk + patient speaker talk or (b) cancer exercise specialist talk only. Self-reported PA, exercise motivation, quality of life, fatigue and clinical and demographic characteristics were obtained from n = 148 (intervention: n = 69; control: n = 79) patients immediately prior to the seminar, and at follow-up ≈ 100 days later. Data were analysed using ANCOVA models and χ2 tests. Fourteen semi-structured interviews with intervention participants, which explored how the intervention was experienced, were analysed using a grounded theory-style approach. Results: The intervention had no significant effect on quantitatively self-reported PA (p = 0.4). However, the intervention was statistically and clinically beneficial for fatigue (p = 0.04) and quality of life (p = 0.01). Qualitative analysis showed that the intervention was beneficial to psychological wellbeing and some participants had increased intention to engage in PA as a result of the intervention. Conclusions: A brief one-off PA-based presentation for men with PCa, delivered by a former patient alongside cancer exercise specialist advice, may result in clinically significant benefits to quality of life and may influence PA intention in certain individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]