Key result
Home-based cardiac rehabilitation moderately improves cardiorespiratory fitness and quality of life in cancer patients.
Why the study?
People with cancer have increased cardiovascular risk and limited access to center-based exercise cardiac rehabilitation, necessitating evaluation of home-based exCR effectiveness and safety.
Does home-based structured exercise incorporating cardiac rehabilitation principles improve cardiorespiratory fitness and health-related quality of life in adult cancer patients compared to usual care?
Meta-Analysis (n=632)
Yes
Does home-based structured exercise incorporating cardiac rehabilitation principles improve cardiorespiratory fitness and health-related quality of life in adult cancer patients compared to usual care?
Standardized Mean Difference: 0.42 (95% CI 0.09–0.75)
Home-based exercise aligned with cardiac rehabilitation principles is feasible and significantly improves cardiorespiratory fitness and quality of life in oncology populations, offering an alternative to center-based programs.
Supports home-based cardiac rehabilitation in cancer survivorship care; extends cardiac rehab evidence to oncology populations.
BACKGROUND: People with cancer are at increased cardiovascular risk due to treatment-related cardiotoxicity and shared risk factors. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (exCR) may mitigate these risks, but access to center-based programs is limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness, safety, and adherence of home-based exCR in oncology populations. METHODS: Six databases were searched in January 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of home-based exCR in adults with cancer. Eligible interventions included structured aerobic and/or resistance exercise consistent with established CR guidelines. Primary outcomes were cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), adherence, and safety. Random-effects meta-analyses used standardized mean differences (SMDs). RESULTS: ²=84%). TESTEX scores indicated generally good methodological and reporting quality (mean 10/15; range 7-13). Adherence exceeded 75% in most studies reporting this outcome, and dropout was 15.2%. Adverse-event reporting was inconsistent; no clear safety signal emerged, but evidence was insufficient for firm conclusions. Strength and fatigue findings were inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS: Home-based exCR appears feasible and may improve CRF and HRQoL in people with cancer, offering an accessible alternative or complement to center-based rehabilitation. Incomplete adverse-event reporting limits safety conclusions. Future studies should evaluate full, multi-component CR models in oncology.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Winnige et al. (2026) conducted a meta-analysis in Cancer (n=632). Home-based exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (exCR) vs. Usual care or no structured exercise intervention was evaluated on Cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) (SMD 0.42, 95% CI 0.09-0.75). Home-based exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation moderately improved cardiorespiratory fitness (SMD 0.42) and health-related quality of life (SMD 0.63) in people diagnosed with cancer.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: