z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Supervised versus autonomous exercise training in breast cancer patients: A multicenter randomized clinical trial
Author(s) -
Westphal Theresa,
Rinnerthaler Gabriel,
Gampenrieder Simon Peter,
Niebauer Josef,
Thaler Josef,
Pfob Michael,
Fuchs David,
Riedmann Marina,
Mayr Barbara,
Reich Bernhard,
Melchardt Thomas,
Mlineritsch Brigitte,
Pleyer Lisa,
Greil Richard
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
cancer medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.403
H-Index - 53
ISSN - 2045-7634
DOI - 10.1002/cam4.1851
Subject(s) - medicine , clinical endpoint , aromatase inhibitor , breast cancer , randomized controlled trial , confidence interval , physical therapy , aromatase , cancer
Abstract Background There is a well‐known correlation between obesity, sedentary lifestyle, and breast cancer incidence and outcome. The Arbeitsgemeinschaft Medikamentöse Tumortherapie (AGMT) exercise study was a multicenter, randomized clinical trial and assessed the feasibility and efficacy of physical training in 50 breast cancer patients undergoing aromatase inhibitor treatment. Methods Postmenopausal, estrogen receptor‐positive breast cancer patients under aromatase inhibitor treatment were randomized 1:1 to counseling and unsupervised training for 48 weeks (unsupervised arm) or counseling and a sequential training (supervised arm) with a supervised phase (24 weeks) followed by unsupervised physical training (further 24 weeks). Primary endpoint was the individual maximum power output on a cycle ergometer after 24 weeks of exercise. A key secondary endpoint was the feasibility of achieving 12 METh/week (metabolic equivalent of task hours per week). Results Twenty‐three patients (92%) in the unsupervised arm and 19 patients (76%) in the supervised arm with early‐stage breast cancer completed the study. After 24 weeks, the supervised arm achieved a significantly higher maximum output in watt (mean 132 ±  standard deviation [SD] 34; 95% confidence interval [CI] 117‐147) compared to baseline (107 ± 25; 95%CI 97‐117; P  = 0.012) with a numerically higher output than the unsupervised arm (week 24 115 ± 25; 95%CI 105‐125; P  = 0.059). Significantly higher METh/week was reported in the supervised arm compared to the unsupervised arm during the whole study period (week 1‐24 unsupervised: 18.3 (7.6‐58.3); supervised: 28.5 (6.7‐40.1); P  = 0.043; week 25‐48; P  = 0.041)). Conclusion This trial indicates that patients in an exercise program achieve higher fitness levels during supervised than unsupervised training.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here