| 1. |
- Western, Benedikte, et al.
(författare)
-
Dropout from exercise trials among cancer survivors—An individual patient data meta-analysis from the POLARIS study
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports. - Chichester, West Sussex : Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Inc.. - 0905-7188 .- 1600-0838. ; 34:2, s. 1-10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: The number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of exercise among cancer survivors has increased in recent years; however, participants dropping out of the trials are rarely described. The objective of the present study was to assess which combinations of participant and exercise program characteristics were associated with dropout from the exercise arms of RCTs among cancer survivors. Methods: This study used data collected in the Predicting OptimaL cAncer RehabIlitation and Supportive care (POLARIS) study, an international database of RCTs investigating the effects of exercise among cancer survivors. Thirty-four exercise trials, with a total of 2467 patients without metastatic disease randomized to an exercise arm were included. Harmonized studies included a pre and a posttest, and participants were classified as dropouts when missing all assessments at the post-intervention test. Subgroups were identified with a conditional inference tree. Results: Overall, 9.6% of the participants dropped out. Five subgroups were identified in the conditional inference tree based on four significant associations with dropout. Most dropout was observed for participants with BMI >28.4 kg/m2, performing supervised resistance or unsupervised mixed exercise (19.8% dropout) or had low-medium education and performed aerobic or supervised mixed exercise (13.5%). The lowest dropout was found for participants with BMI >28.4 kg/m2 and high education performing aerobic or supervised mixed exercise (5.1%), and participants with BMI ≤28.4 kg/m2 exercising during (5.2%) or post (9.5%) treatment. Conclusions: There are several systematic differences between cancer survivors completing and dropping out from exercise trials, possibly affecting the external validity of exercise effects. © 2024 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science In Sports published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
|
|
| 2. |
- Abrahams, Harriët J. G., et al.
(författare)
-
Moderators of the effect of psychosocial interventions on fatigue in women with breast cancer and men with prostate cancer : Individual patient data meta-analyses
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Psycho-Oncology. - : Wiley. - 1057-9249 .- 1099-1611. ; 29:11, s. 1772-1785
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- ObjectivePsychosocial interventions can reduce cancer‐related fatigue effectively. However, it is still unclear if intervention effects differ across subgroups of patients. These meta‐analyses aimed at evaluating moderator effects of (a) sociodemographic characteristics, (b) clinical characteristics, (c) baseline levels of fatigue and other symptoms, and (d) intervention‐related characteristics on the effect of psychosocial interventions on cancer‐related fatigue in patients with non‐metastatic breast and prostate cancer.MethodsData were retrieved from the Predicting OptimaL cAncer RehabIlitation and Supportive care (POLARIS) consortium. Potential moderators were studied with meta‐analyses of pooled individual patient data from 14 randomized controlled trials through linear mixed‐effects models with interaction tests. The analyses were conducted separately in patients with breast (n = 1091) and prostate cancer (n = 1008).ResultsStatistically significant, small overall effects of psychosocial interventions on fatigue were found (breast cancer: β = −0.19 [95% confidence interval (95%CI) = −0.30; −0.08]; prostate cancer: β = −0.11 [95%CI = −0.21; −0.00]). In both patient groups, intervention effects did not differ significantly by sociodemographic or clinical characteristics, nor by baseline levels of fatigue or pain. For intervention‐related moderators (only tested among women with breast cancer), statistically significant larger effects were found for cognitive behavioral therapy as intervention strategy (β = −0.27 [95%CI = −0.40; −0.15]), fatigue‐specific interventions (β = −0.48 [95%CI = −0.79; −0.18]), and interventions that only targeted patients with clinically relevant fatigue (β = −0.85 [95%CI = −1.40; −0.30]).ConclusionsOur findings did not provide evidence that any selected demographic or clinical characteristic, or baseline levels of fatigue or pain, moderated effects of psychosocial interventions on fatigue. A specific focus on decreasing fatigue seems beneficial for patients with breast cancer with clinically relevant fatigue.
|
|
