Search

Background: While therapeutically effective, chemoradiotherapy treatment for high-grade glioma (glioblastoma) is often accompanied by side effects. Exercise has been demonstrated to alleviate the adverse effects of such treatments in other cancers. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of supervised exercise incorporating autoregulation. Methods: Thirty glioblastoma patients were recruited, five declined exercise and 25 were provided with a multimodal exercise intervention for the duration of their chemoradiotherapy treatment. Patient recruitment, retention, adherence to training sessions and safety were evaluated throughout the study. Physical function, body composition, fatigue, sleep quality, and quality of life were evaluated before and after the exercise intervention. Results: Eight of the 25 participants commencing exercise withdrew prior to completion of the study (32%). Seventeen patients (68%) demonstrated low to high adherence (33%–100%) and exercise dosage compliance (24%–83%). There were no reported adverse events. Significant improvements were observed for all trained exercises and lower limb muscle strength and function with no significant changes observed for any other physical function, body composition, fatigue, sleep, or quality of life outcomes. Conclusions: Only half of glioblastoma patients recruited were willing or able to commence, complete or meet minimum dose compliance for the exercise intervention during chemoradiotherapy indicating the intervention evaluated may not be feasible for part of this patient cohort. For those who were able to complete the exercise program, supervised, autoregulated, multimodal exercise was safe and significantly improved strength and function and may have prevented deterioration in body composition and quality of life.

Purpose: Exercise has been underutilized in people with advanced or incurable cancer despite the potential to improve physical function and reduce psychosocial morbidity, especially for people with bone metastases because of concerns over skeletal complications. The International Bone Metastases Exercise Working Group (IBMEWG) was formed to develop best practice recommendations for exercise programming for people with bone metastases on the basis of published research, clinical experience, and expert opinion. Methods: The IBMEWG undertook sequential steps to inform the recommendations: (1) modified Delphi survey, (2) systematic review, (3) cross-sectional survey to physicians and nurse practitioners, (4) in-person meeting of IBMEWG to review evidence from steps 1-3 to develop draft recommendations, and (5) stakeholder engagement. Results: Recommendations emerged from the contributing evidence and IBMEWG discussion for pre-exercise screening, exercise testing, exercise prescription, and monitoring of exercise response. Identification of individuals who are potentially at higher risk of exercise-related skeletal complication is a complex interplay of these factors: (1) lesion-related, (2) cancer and cancer treatment–related, and (3) the person-related. Exercise assessment and prescription requires consideration of the location and presentation of bone lesion(s) and should be delivered by qualified exercise professionals with oncology education and exercise prescription experience. Emphasis on postural alignment, controlled movement, and proper technique is essential. Conclusion: Ultimately, the perceived risk of skeletal complications should be weighed against potential health benefits on the basis of consultation between the person, health care team, and exercise professionals. These recommendations provide an initial framework to improve the integration of exercise programming into clinical care for people with bone metastases.

PURPOSE: Exercise has been underutilized in people with advanced or incurable cancer despite the potential to improve physical function and reduce psychosocial morbidity, especially for people with bone metastases because of concerns over skeletal complications. The International Bone Metastases Exercise Working Group (IBMEWG) was formed to develop best practice recommendations for exercise programming for people with bone metastases on the basis of published research, clinical experience, and expert opinion. METHODS: The IBMEWG undertook sequential steps to inform the recommendations: (1) modified Delphi survey, (2) systematic review, (3) cross-sectional survey to physicians and nurse practitioners, (4) in-person meeting of IBMEWG to review evidence from steps 1-3 to develop draft recommendations, and (5) stakeholder engagement. RESULTS: Recommendations emerged from the contributing evidence and IBMEWG discussion for pre-exercise screening, exercise testing, exercise prescription, and monitoring of exercise response. Identification of individuals who are potentially at higher risk of exercise-related skeletal complication is a complex interplay of these factors: (1) lesion-related, (2) cancer and cancer treatment-related, and (3) the person-related. Exercise assessment and prescription requires consideration of the location and presentation of bone lesion(s) and should be delivered by qualified exercise professionals with oncology education and exercise prescription experience. Emphasis on postural alignment, controlled movement, and proper technique is essential. CONCLUSION: Ultimately, the perceived risk of skeletal complications should be weighed against potential health benefits on the basis of consultation between the person, health care team, and exercise professionals. These recommendations provide an initial framework to improve the integration of exercise programming into clinical care for people with bone metastases.

Background: Radiotherapy (RT) can lead to cancer-related fatigue (CRF) and decreased health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in breast cancer patients. The purpose of this trial was to examine the feasibility and efficacy of a home-based resistance and aerobic exercise intervention for reducing CRF and improving HRQoL in breast cancer patients during RT. Methods: Women with breast cancer (N = 106) commencing RT were randomized to 12 weeks of home-based resistance and aerobic exercise (EX) or usual care/control (CON). The primary endpoint was CRF, with secondary endpoints of HRQoL, sleep duration and quality, and physical activity. Measurements were undertaken prior to RT, at completion of RT (~ 6 weeks), at completion of the intervention (12 weeks), and 6 and 12 months after RT completion, while CRF was also measured weekly during RT. Results: Eighty-nine women completed the study (EX = 43, CON = 46). Over the 12-week intervention, EX completed 1 – 2 resistance training sessions and accumulated 30–40 min of aerobic exercise weekly. For CRF, EX had a quicker recovery both during and post-RT compared to CON (p < 0.05). Moreover, there was a significant difference in HRQoL between groups at RT completion, with HRQoL unchanged in CON and higher in EX (p < 0.05). There was no change in sleep duration or quality for either group and there were no exercise-related adverse effects. Conclusions: Home-based resistance and aerobic exercise during RT is safe, feasible, and effective in accelerating CRF recovery and improving HRQoL. Improvements in CRF and HRQoL for these patients can be achieved with smaller exercise dosages than stated in the generic recommendations for breast cancer.

PURPOSE:Exercise has been underutilized in people with advanced or incurable cancer despite the potential to improve physical function and reduce psychosocial morbidity, especially for people with bone metastases because of concerns over skeletal complications. The International Bone Metastases Exercise Working Group (IBMEWG) was formed to develop best practice recommendations for exercise programming for people with bone metastases on the basis of published research, clinical experience, and expert opinion.METHODS:The IBMEWG undertook sequential steps to inform the recommendations: (1) modified Delphi survey, (2) systematic review, (3) cross-sectional survey to physicians and nurse practitioners, (4) in-person meeting of IBMEWG to review evidence from steps 1-3 to develop draft recommendations, and (5) stakeholder engagement.RESULTS:Recommendations emerged from the contributing evidence and IBMEWG discussion for pre-exercise screening, exercise testing, exercise prescription, and monitoring of exercise response. Identification of individuals who are potentially at higher risk of exercise-related skeletal complication is a complex interplay of these factors: (1) lesion-related, (2) cancer and cancer treatment-related, and (3) the person-related. Exercise assessment and prescription requires consideration of the location and presentation of bone lesion(s) and should be delivered by qualified exercise professionals with oncology education and exercise prescription experience. Emphasis on postural alignment, controlled movement, and proper technique is essential.CONCLUSION:Ultimately, the perceived risk of skeletal complications should be weighed against potential health benefits on the basis of consultation between the person, health care team, and exercise professionals. These recommendations provide an initial framework to improve the integration of exercise programming into clinical care for people with bone metastases.

Physical activity (PA) has shown to mitigate many of the common side effects of cancer treatments. The promotion of PA by health care professionals (HCPs) can facilitate the adoption of PA by patients with cancer. Drawing on an empirical ethics of care approach, this article explores how the delivery of PA recommendations is done within clinical cancer care. Based on 175 observations of consultations between doctors, nurses and patients and interviews with 27 doctors and nurses, we show how delivering PA recommendations was related to four care practices: “adjusting information to match the patient’s needs and situation,” “managing current and anticipated treatment-induced side effects,” “using visual aids and quantifiable data,” and “maintaining a good relationship between the patient and the HCP.” Drawing on these findings, we discuss strategies to strengthen the delivery of PA recommendations in clinical cancer care.