Concurrent versus sequential exercise therapy showed no significant difference in cardiorespiratory fitness improvement relative to usual care (difference -0.88 mL O2·kg-1·min-1; P=0.48).
RCT (n=158)
1:1 ratio
Does the timing of exercise therapy (concurrent vs sequential) improve cardiorespiratory fitness in inactive women with breast cancer initiating chemotherapy?
There is no significant difference in cardiorespiratory fitness improvement between concurrent versus sequential exercise therapy relative to usual care in women with primary breast cancer, though continuous exercise showed promising benefits.
Effect estimate: Difference -0.88 mL O2·kg-1·min-1 (95% CI -3.36, 1.59)
p-value: p=0.48
AIMS: The most appropriate timing of exercise therapy to improve cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) among patients initiating chemotherapy is not known. The effects of exercise therapy administered during, following, or during and following chemotherapy were examined in patients with breast cancer. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a parallel-group randomized trial design, 158 inactive women with breast cancer initiating (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy were allocated to receive (1:1 ratio): usual care or one of three exercise regimens-concurrent (during chemotherapy only), sequential (after chemotherapy only), or concurrent and sequential (continuous) (n = 39/40 per group). Exercise consisted of treadmill walking three sessions/week, 20-50 min at 55%-100% of peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak) for ≈16 (concurrent, sequential) or ≈32 (continuous) consecutive weeks. VO2peak was evaluated at baseline (pre-treatment), immediately post-chemotherapy, and ≈16 weeks after chemotherapy. In intention-to-treat analysis, there was no difference in the primary endpoint of VO2peak change between concurrent exercise and usual care during chemotherapy vs. VO2peak change between sequential exercise and usual care after chemotherapy overall difference, -0.88 mL O2·kg-1·min-1; 95% confidence interval (CI): -3.36, 1.59, P = 0.48. In secondary analysis, continuous exercise, approximately equal to twice the length of the other regimens, was well-tolerated and the only strategy associated with significant improvements in VO2peak from baseline to post-intervention (1.74 mL O2·kg-1·min-1, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There was no statistical difference in CRF improvement between concurrent vs. sequential exercise therapy relative to usual care in women with primary breast cancer. The promising tolerability and CRF benefit of ≈32 weeks of continuous exercise therapy warrant further evaluation in larger trials.
Scott et al. (Tue,) conducted a rct in Breast cancer (n=158). Exercise therapy (concurrent, sequential, or continuous) vs. Usual care was evaluated on Difference in VO2peak change between concurrent exercise and usual care during chemotherapy vs. sequential exercise and usual care after chemotherapy (Difference -0.88 mL O2·kg-1·min-1, 95% CI -3.36, 1.59, p=0.48). Concurrent versus sequential exercise therapy showed no significant difference in cardiorespiratory fitness improvement relative to usual care (difference -0.88 mL O2·kg-1·min-1; P=0.48).