针对癌症患者疲劳的心血管训练。

IF 8.8 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Pub Date : 2025-02-20 DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD015517
Carina Wagner, Moritz Ernst, Nora Cryns, Annika Oeser, Sarah Messer, Andreas Wender, Joachim Wiskemann, Freerk T Baumann, Ina Monsef, Paul J Bröckelmann, Ulrike Holtkamp, Roberta W Scherer, Shiraz I Mishra, Nicole Skoetz
{"title":"针对癌症患者疲劳的心血管训练。","authors":"Carina Wagner, Moritz Ernst, Nora Cryns, Annika Oeser, Sarah Messer, Andreas Wender, Joachim Wiskemann, Freerk T Baumann, Ina Monsef, Paul J Bröckelmann, Ulrike Holtkamp, Roberta W Scherer, Shiraz I Mishra, Nicole Skoetz","doi":"10.1002/14651858.CD015517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Rationale: </strong>Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is the most prevalent and severe symptom among people with cancer. It can be attributed to the cancer itself or to anticancer therapies. CRF affects the individual physically and mentally, and cannot be alleviated by rest. Studies show a positive effect of exercise on CRF.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the effects of cardiovascular training on cancer-related fatigue (CRF), quality of life (QoL), adverse events, anxiety, and depression in people with cancer, with regard to their stage of anticancer therapy (before, during, or after), up to 12 weeks, up to six months, or longer, postintervention.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization ICTRP to identify studies that are included in the review. The latest search date was October 2023.</p><p><strong>Eligibility criteria: </strong>We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating cardiovascular training for CRF or QoL, or both, in people with cancer. Trials were eligible if training was structured, included at least five sessions, and instruction was face-to-face (via video tools or in person). We excluded studies with fewer than 20 randomised participants per group and where only an abstract was available.</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>Our critical outcomes were: short-, medium-, long-term CRF and QoL. Important outcomes were adverse events, and short-, medium-, long-term anxiety and depression.</p><p><strong>Risk of bias: </strong>We used the Cochrane RoB 1 tool to assess bias in RCTs.</p><p><strong>Synthesis methods: </strong>We used standard Cochrane methodology. We synthesised results for each outcome using meta-analysis where possible (inverse variance or Mantel-Haenszel; random-effects model). We pooled data for the respective assessment periods above. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.</p><p><strong>Included studies: </strong>We included 23 RCTs with 2135 participants, of whom 96.6% originated from high-income countries; 1101 participants were randomised to cardiovascular training and 1034 to no training. Studies included mostly females who were diagnosed with breast cancer. We also identified 36 ongoing and 12 completed studies that have not yet published (awaiting assessment). We only present findings on CRF, QoL and adverse events. For details regarding anxiety and depression, see full text.</p><p><strong>Synthesis of results: </strong>Cardiovascular training before anticancer therapy versus no training for people with cancer We identified no studies for inclusion in this comparison. Cardiovascular training during anticancer therapy versus no training for people with cancer We included 10 studies (1026 participants); eight studies contributed data to quantitative analyses (860 participants). Cardiovascular training probably reduces short-term CRF slightly (mean difference (MD) 2.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16 to 4.55, on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Fatigue (FACT-F), scale 0 to 52, higher values mean better outcome; minimally important difference (MID) 3; 6 studies, 593 participants) and probably results in little to no difference in short-term QoL (MD 3.56, 95% CI 0.21 to 6.90, on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ C-30), scale 0 to 100, higher values mean better outcome, MID 10; 6 studies, 612 participants) (both moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effects on medium-term CRF (MD 2.67, 95% CI -2.58 to 7.92, on FACT-F; MID 3; 1 study, 62 participants), long-term CRF (MD 0.41, 95% CI -2.24 to 3.05, on FACT-F; MID 3; 2 studies, 230 participants), medium-term QoL (MD 6.79, 95% CI -4.39 to 17.97, on EORTC QLQ C-30; MID 10; 1 study, 62 participants), and long-term QoL (MD 1.51, 95% CI -3.40 to 6.42, on EORTC QLQ C-30; MID 10; 2 studies, 230 participants) (all very low-certainty evidence). For adverse events (any grade and follow-up), we did not perform meta-analysis due to heterogeneous definitions, reporting, and measurement (9 RCTs, 955 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Cardiovascular training after anticancer therapy versus no training for people with cancer We included 13 studies (1109 participants); nine studies contributed data to quantitative analyses (756 participants). We are uncertain about the effects of cardiovascular training on short-term CRF (MD 3.62, 95% CI 0 to 7.13, on FACT-F; MID 3; 6 studies, 497 participants), long-term CRF (MD -0.80, 95% CI -1.72 to 0.13, on the Fatigue Symptom Inventory (FSI), scale 1 to 10, higher values mean worse outcome; MID 1; 2 studies, 262 participants), short-term QoL (MD 3.70, 95% CI -0.14 to 7.41, on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G), scale 0 to 108, higher values mean better outcome; MID 4; 8 studies, 642 participants), long-term QoL (MD 3.10, 95% CI -1.12 to 7.32, on FACT-G; MID 4; 1 study, 201 participants), and adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 2.71, 95% CI 0.58 to 12.67; 1 study, 50 participants) (all very low-certainty evidence). There were no data for medium-term CRF and QoL.</p><p><strong>Authors' conclusions: </strong>Moderate-certainty evidence shows that cardiovascular training by people with cancer during their anticancer therapy slightly reduces short-term CRF and results in little to no difference in short-term QoL. We do not know whether cardiovascular training increases or decreases medium-term CRF/QoL, and long-term CRF/QoL. There is very low-certainty evidence (due to heterogeneous definitions, reporting and measurement) evaluating whether the training increases or decreases adverse events. In people with cancer who perform cardiovascular training after anticancer therapy, we are uncertain about the effects on short-term CRF/QoL, long-term CRF/QoL, and adverse events. We identified a lack of evidence concerning cardiovascular training before anticancer therapy and on safety outcomes. The 36 ongoing and 12 completed, but unpublished, studies could help close this gap, and could contribute to improving the effect estimates and certainty.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This Cochrane review was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research of Germany, grant number: FKZ 01KG2017.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>Protocol available via DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015211.</p>","PeriodicalId":10473,"journal":{"name":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","volume":"2 ","pages":"CD015517"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11840886/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cardiovascular training for fatigue in people with cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Carina Wagner, Moritz Ernst, Nora Cryns, Annika Oeser, Sarah Messer, Andreas Wender, Joachim Wiskemann, Freerk T Baumann, Ina Monsef, Paul J Bröckelmann, Ulrike Holtkamp, Roberta W Scherer, Shiraz I Mishra, Nicole Skoetz\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/14651858.CD015517\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Rationale: </strong>Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is the most prevalent and severe symptom among people with cancer. It can be attributed to the cancer itself or to anticancer therapies. CRF affects the individual physically and mentally, and cannot be alleviated by rest. Studies show a positive effect of exercise on CRF.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the effects of cardiovascular training on cancer-related fatigue (CRF), quality of life (QoL), adverse events, anxiety, and depression in people with cancer, with regard to their stage of anticancer therapy (before, during, or after), up to 12 weeks, up to six months, or longer, postintervention.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization ICTRP to identify studies that are included in the review. The latest search date was October 2023.</p><p><strong>Eligibility criteria: </strong>We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating cardiovascular training for CRF or QoL, or both, in people with cancer. Trials were eligible if training was structured, included at least five sessions, and instruction was face-to-face (via video tools or in person). We excluded studies with fewer than 20 randomised participants per group and where only an abstract was available.</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>Our critical outcomes were: short-, medium-, long-term CRF and QoL. Important outcomes were adverse events, and short-, medium-, long-term anxiety and depression.</p><p><strong>Risk of bias: </strong>We used the Cochrane RoB 1 tool to assess bias in RCTs.</p><p><strong>Synthesis methods: </strong>We used standard Cochrane methodology. We synthesised results for each outcome using meta-analysis where possible (inverse variance or Mantel-Haenszel; random-effects model). We pooled data for the respective assessment periods above. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.</p><p><strong>Included studies: </strong>We included 23 RCTs with 2135 participants, of whom 96.6% originated from high-income countries; 1101 participants were randomised to cardiovascular training and 1034 to no training. Studies included mostly females who were diagnosed with breast cancer. We also identified 36 ongoing and 12 completed studies that have not yet published (awaiting assessment). We only present findings on CRF, QoL and adverse events. For details regarding anxiety and depression, see full text.</p><p><strong>Synthesis of results: </strong>Cardiovascular training before anticancer therapy versus no training for people with cancer We identified no studies for inclusion in this comparison. Cardiovascular training during anticancer therapy versus no training for people with cancer We included 10 studies (1026 participants); eight studies contributed data to quantitative analyses (860 participants). Cardiovascular training probably reduces short-term CRF slightly (mean difference (MD) 2.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16 to 4.55, on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Fatigue (FACT-F), scale 0 to 52, higher values mean better outcome; minimally important difference (MID) 3; 6 studies, 593 participants) and probably results in little to no difference in short-term QoL (MD 3.56, 95% CI 0.21 to 6.90, on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ C-30), scale 0 to 100, higher values mean better outcome, MID 10; 6 studies, 612 participants) (both moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effects on medium-term CRF (MD 2.67, 95% CI -2.58 to 7.92, on FACT-F; MID 3; 1 study, 62 participants), long-term CRF (MD 0.41, 95% CI -2.24 to 3.05, on FACT-F; MID 3; 2 studies, 230 participants), medium-term QoL (MD 6.79, 95% CI -4.39 to 17.97, on EORTC QLQ C-30; MID 10; 1 study, 62 participants), and long-term QoL (MD 1.51, 95% CI -3.40 to 6.42, on EORTC QLQ C-30; MID 10; 2 studies, 230 participants) (all very low-certainty evidence). For adverse events (any grade and follow-up), we did not perform meta-analysis due to heterogeneous definitions, reporting, and measurement (9 RCTs, 955 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Cardiovascular training after anticancer therapy versus no training for people with cancer We included 13 studies (1109 participants); nine studies contributed data to quantitative analyses (756 participants). We are uncertain about the effects of cardiovascular training on short-term CRF (MD 3.62, 95% CI 0 to 7.13, on FACT-F; MID 3; 6 studies, 497 participants), long-term CRF (MD -0.80, 95% CI -1.72 to 0.13, on the Fatigue Symptom Inventory (FSI), scale 1 to 10, higher values mean worse outcome; MID 1; 2 studies, 262 participants), short-term QoL (MD 3.70, 95% CI -0.14 to 7.41, on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G), scale 0 to 108, higher values mean better outcome; MID 4; 8 studies, 642 participants), long-term QoL (MD 3.10, 95% CI -1.12 to 7.32, on FACT-G; MID 4; 1 study, 201 participants), and adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 2.71, 95% CI 0.58 to 12.67; 1 study, 50 participants) (all very low-certainty evidence). There were no data for medium-term CRF and QoL.</p><p><strong>Authors' conclusions: </strong>Moderate-certainty evidence shows that cardiovascular training by people with cancer during their anticancer therapy slightly reduces short-term CRF and results in little to no difference in short-term QoL. We do not know whether cardiovascular training increases or decreases medium-term CRF/QoL, and long-term CRF/QoL. There is very low-certainty evidence (due to heterogeneous definitions, reporting and measurement) evaluating whether the training increases or decreases adverse events. In people with cancer who perform cardiovascular training after anticancer therapy, we are uncertain about the effects on short-term CRF/QoL, long-term CRF/QoL, and adverse events. We identified a lack of evidence concerning cardiovascular training before anticancer therapy and on safety outcomes. The 36 ongoing and 12 completed, but unpublished, studies could help close this gap, and could contribute to improving the effect estimates and certainty.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This Cochrane review was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research of Germany, grant number: FKZ 01KG2017.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>Protocol available via DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015211.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10473,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"2 \",\"pages\":\"CD015517\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11840886/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD015517\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD015517","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

理由:癌症相关性疲劳(CRF)是癌症患者中最普遍和最严重的症状。这可以归因于癌症本身,也可以归因于抗癌治疗。CRF对个体的身心都有影响,不能通过休息来缓解。研究表明运动对CRF有积极的影响。目的:评估心血管训练对癌症患者癌症相关疲劳(CRF)、生活质量(QoL)、不良事件、焦虑和抑郁的影响,以及干预后12周、6个月或更长时间的抗癌治疗阶段(治疗前、治疗中和治疗后)。检索方法:我们检索了CENTRAL、MEDLINE、Embase、ClinicalTrials.gov和World Health Organization ICTRP,以确定纳入本综述的研究。最近一次搜索日期是2023年10月。入选标准:我们纳入了评估心血管训练对癌症患者的CRF或QoL或两者的影响的随机对照试验(RCTs)。如果培训是有组织的,包括至少五个课程,并且教学是面对面的(通过视频工具或亲自),则试验符合条件。我们排除了每组随机受试者少于20人且只有摘要可用的研究。结果:我们的关键结果是:短期、中期、长期的CRF和生活质量。重要的结局是不良事件,以及短期、中期、长期的焦虑和抑郁。偏倚风险:我们使用Cochrane RoB 1工具评估随机对照试验的偏倚。综合方法:采用标准Cochrane方法学。在可能的情况下,我们使用荟萃分析综合了每个结果的结果(逆方差或Mantel-Haenszel;随机模型)。我们汇总了上述各评估期的数据。我们使用GRADE来评估每个结果证据的确定性。纳入的研究:我们纳入了23项随机对照试验,2135名受试者,其中96.6%来自高收入国家;1101名参与者被随机分配到心血管训练组,1034名参与者没有接受训练。研究对象主要是被诊断患有乳腺癌的女性。我们还确定了36项正在进行的研究和12项已完成的研究尚未发表(等待评估)。我们只介绍了CRF、QoL和不良事件的研究结果。有关焦虑和抑郁的详细信息,请参阅全文。结果综合:癌症患者在抗癌治疗前进行心血管训练与不进行训练的对比我们没有发现任何研究纳入这项比较。癌症患者在抗癌治疗期间进行心血管训练与不进行训练的对比我们纳入了10项研究(1026名受试者);8项研究为定量分析提供了数据(860名参与者)。在癌症治疗功能评估-疲劳(FACT-F)中,心血管训练可能会稍微降低短期CRF(平均差值(MD) 2.85, 95%可信区间(CI) 1.16至4.55,评分0至52,数值越高意味着结果越好;最小重要差异(MID) 3;6项研究,593名参与者),可能导致短期生活质量差异很小或没有差异(MD 3.56, 95% CI 0.21至6.90,欧洲癌症研究和治疗组织生活质量问卷C30 (EORTC QLQ C-30),评分0至100,更高的值意味着更好的结果,MID 10;6项研究,612名参与者)(均为中等确定性证据)。我们不确定中期CRF (MD 2.67, 95% CI -2.58至7.92)对FACT-F的影响;中期3;1项研究,62名受试者),长期CRF (MD 0.41, 95% CI -2.24 - 3.05, FACT-F;中期3;2项研究,230名受试者),中期生活质量(MD 6.79, 95% CI -4.39至17.97,EORTC QLQ C-30;中期10;1项研究,62名参与者)和长期生活质量(MD 1.51, 95% CI -3.40至6.42,EORTC QLQ C-30;中期10;2项研究,230名参与者)(都是非常低确定性的证据)。对于不良事件(任何级别和随访),由于定义、报告和测量的异质性,我们没有进行荟萃分析(9项随机对照试验,955名参与者;非常低确定性证据)。癌症患者在抗癌治疗后进行心血管训练与不进行训练的对比我们纳入了13项研究(1109名参与者);9项研究为定量分析提供了数据(756名参与者)。我们不确定心血管训练对短期CRF的影响(MD 3.62, 95% CI 0 - 7.13, FACT-F;中期3;6项研究,497名参与者),疲劳症状量表(FSI)的长期CRF (MD -0.80, 95% CI -1.72至0.13,量表1至10,数值越高意味着结果越差;中期1;2项研究,262名受试者),短期生活质量(MD 3.70, 95% CI -0.14至7.41,在癌症治疗功能评估-一般(FACT-G)中,评分为0至108,更高的值意味着更好的结果;中期4;8项研究,642名受试者),长期生活质量(MD 3.10, 95% CI -1.12 - 7.32, on FACT-G;中期4;1项研究,201名受试者)和不良事件(风险比(RR) 2.71, 95% CI 0.58 ~ 12.67;1项研究,50名参与者)(都是非常低确定性的证据)。 没有中期CRF和QoL的数据。作者的结论:中等确定性的证据表明,癌症患者在抗癌治疗期间进行心血管训练会略微降低短期CRF,对短期生活质量的影响很小或没有影响。我们不知道心血管训练是否增加或降低中期CRF/QoL和长期CRF/QoL。有非常低确定性的证据(由于不同的定义、报告和测量)来评估训练是否增加或减少不良事件。在抗癌治疗后进行心血管训练的癌症患者中,我们不确定其对短期CRF/QoL、长期CRF/QoL和不良事件的影响。我们发现缺乏关于抗癌治疗前心血管训练和安全性结果的证据。36项正在进行的研究和12项已完成但未发表的研究可以帮助缩小这一差距,并有助于提高对效果的估计和确定性。资助:本Cochrane综述由德国联邦教育与研究部资助,资助号:FKZ 01KG2017。注册:协议可通过DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015211获得。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cardiovascular training for fatigue in people with cancer.

Rationale: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is the most prevalent and severe symptom among people with cancer. It can be attributed to the cancer itself or to anticancer therapies. CRF affects the individual physically and mentally, and cannot be alleviated by rest. Studies show a positive effect of exercise on CRF.

Objectives: To evaluate the effects of cardiovascular training on cancer-related fatigue (CRF), quality of life (QoL), adverse events, anxiety, and depression in people with cancer, with regard to their stage of anticancer therapy (before, during, or after), up to 12 weeks, up to six months, or longer, postintervention.

Search methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization ICTRP to identify studies that are included in the review. The latest search date was October 2023.

Eligibility criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating cardiovascular training for CRF or QoL, or both, in people with cancer. Trials were eligible if training was structured, included at least five sessions, and instruction was face-to-face (via video tools or in person). We excluded studies with fewer than 20 randomised participants per group and where only an abstract was available.

Outcomes: Our critical outcomes were: short-, medium-, long-term CRF and QoL. Important outcomes were adverse events, and short-, medium-, long-term anxiety and depression.

Risk of bias: We used the Cochrane RoB 1 tool to assess bias in RCTs.

Synthesis methods: We used standard Cochrane methodology. We synthesised results for each outcome using meta-analysis where possible (inverse variance or Mantel-Haenszel; random-effects model). We pooled data for the respective assessment periods above. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.

Included studies: We included 23 RCTs with 2135 participants, of whom 96.6% originated from high-income countries; 1101 participants were randomised to cardiovascular training and 1034 to no training. Studies included mostly females who were diagnosed with breast cancer. We also identified 36 ongoing and 12 completed studies that have not yet published (awaiting assessment). We only present findings on CRF, QoL and adverse events. For details regarding anxiety and depression, see full text.

Synthesis of results: Cardiovascular training before anticancer therapy versus no training for people with cancer We identified no studies for inclusion in this comparison. Cardiovascular training during anticancer therapy versus no training for people with cancer We included 10 studies (1026 participants); eight studies contributed data to quantitative analyses (860 participants). Cardiovascular training probably reduces short-term CRF slightly (mean difference (MD) 2.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16 to 4.55, on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Fatigue (FACT-F), scale 0 to 52, higher values mean better outcome; minimally important difference (MID) 3; 6 studies, 593 participants) and probably results in little to no difference in short-term QoL (MD 3.56, 95% CI 0.21 to 6.90, on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ C-30), scale 0 to 100, higher values mean better outcome, MID 10; 6 studies, 612 participants) (both moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effects on medium-term CRF (MD 2.67, 95% CI -2.58 to 7.92, on FACT-F; MID 3; 1 study, 62 participants), long-term CRF (MD 0.41, 95% CI -2.24 to 3.05, on FACT-F; MID 3; 2 studies, 230 participants), medium-term QoL (MD 6.79, 95% CI -4.39 to 17.97, on EORTC QLQ C-30; MID 10; 1 study, 62 participants), and long-term QoL (MD 1.51, 95% CI -3.40 to 6.42, on EORTC QLQ C-30; MID 10; 2 studies, 230 participants) (all very low-certainty evidence). For adverse events (any grade and follow-up), we did not perform meta-analysis due to heterogeneous definitions, reporting, and measurement (9 RCTs, 955 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Cardiovascular training after anticancer therapy versus no training for people with cancer We included 13 studies (1109 participants); nine studies contributed data to quantitative analyses (756 participants). We are uncertain about the effects of cardiovascular training on short-term CRF (MD 3.62, 95% CI 0 to 7.13, on FACT-F; MID 3; 6 studies, 497 participants), long-term CRF (MD -0.80, 95% CI -1.72 to 0.13, on the Fatigue Symptom Inventory (FSI), scale 1 to 10, higher values mean worse outcome; MID 1; 2 studies, 262 participants), short-term QoL (MD 3.70, 95% CI -0.14 to 7.41, on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G), scale 0 to 108, higher values mean better outcome; MID 4; 8 studies, 642 participants), long-term QoL (MD 3.10, 95% CI -1.12 to 7.32, on FACT-G; MID 4; 1 study, 201 participants), and adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 2.71, 95% CI 0.58 to 12.67; 1 study, 50 participants) (all very low-certainty evidence). There were no data for medium-term CRF and QoL.

Authors' conclusions: Moderate-certainty evidence shows that cardiovascular training by people with cancer during their anticancer therapy slightly reduces short-term CRF and results in little to no difference in short-term QoL. We do not know whether cardiovascular training increases or decreases medium-term CRF/QoL, and long-term CRF/QoL. There is very low-certainty evidence (due to heterogeneous definitions, reporting and measurement) evaluating whether the training increases or decreases adverse events. In people with cancer who perform cardiovascular training after anticancer therapy, we are uncertain about the effects on short-term CRF/QoL, long-term CRF/QoL, and adverse events. We identified a lack of evidence concerning cardiovascular training before anticancer therapy and on safety outcomes. The 36 ongoing and 12 completed, but unpublished, studies could help close this gap, and could contribute to improving the effect estimates and certainty.

Funding: This Cochrane review was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research of Germany, grant number: FKZ 01KG2017.

Registration: Protocol available via DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015211.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
2.40%
发文量
173
审稿时长
1-2 weeks
期刊介绍: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) stands as the premier database for systematic reviews in healthcare. It comprises Cochrane Reviews, along with protocols for these reviews, editorials, and supplements. Owned and operated by Cochrane, a worldwide independent network of healthcare stakeholders, the CDSR (ISSN 1469-493X) encompasses a broad spectrum of health-related topics, including health services.
期刊最新文献
Botulinum toxin type A for subacute/chronic neck pain. Pharmacotherapy for post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Surgery for thumb (trapeziometacarpal joint) osteoarthritis. Steroid avoidance or withdrawal for kidney transplant recipients. Early erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in preterm or low-birthweight infants.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1