Efficacy of exercise interventions for women during and after gynaecological cancer treatment - a systematic scoping review.

PURPOSE: To systematically synthesise evidence of exercise intervention efficacy for physical/psychosocial outcomes that matter to women during/following treatment for gynaecological cancer. METHODS: Five databases were searched (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsychInfo, Scopus). Exercise-only intervention studies that included women during/ following treatment for any gynaecological cancer, with/ without control comparison, on any physical or psychosocial outcome(s), were included and qualitatively appraised using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Seven randomised controlled trials (RCTs), three single-arm pre-post studies, and one prospective cohort study satisfied were included (11 studies). Most studies were completed following treatment (91%), included combined (aerobic and resistance; 36%) and aerobic (36%) training, were fully/mostly (63%) unsupervised, and had a moderate-to-high risk of bias. Overall, 33 outcomes (64% objectively-measured) were assessed. Improvements were observed in aerobic capacity (V̇O2 Peak +1.6 mL/kg/min, 6-minute walk distance +20-27 m), lower- (30-second sit-to-stand +2-4 repetitions) and upper-limb strength (30-second arm curl +5 repetitions; 1RM grip strength/chest press +2.4-3.1 kg), and agility (timed up-and-go -0.6 seconds). However, changes in quality of life, anthropometry/body composition, balance and flexibility were inconsistent. There was no evidence to support worsening of outcomes. CONCLUSION: Preliminary research into the role of exercise post-gynaecological cancer suggests an improvement in exercise capacity, muscular strength, and agility which, in the absence of exercise, typically decline following gynaecological cancer. Future exercise trials involving larger and more diverse gynaecological cancer samples will improve understanding of the potential and magnitude of effect of guideline-recommended exercise on outcomes that matter to patients.

The Effect of Exercise on Pain in People with Cancer: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer-related pain is common and undertreated. Exercise is known to have a pain-relieving effect in non-cancer pain. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to evaluate (1) the effect of exercise on cancer-related pain in all cancers, and (2) whether the effect of exercise differed according to exercise mode, degree of supervision, intervention duration and timing (during or after cancer treatment), pain types, measurement tool and cancer type. METHODS: Electronic searches were undertaken in six databases to identify exercise studies evaluating pain in people with cancer, published prior to 11 January 2023. All stages of screening and data extraction were conducted independently by two authors. The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) was used and overall strength of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Meta-analyses were performed overall and by study design, exercise intervention and pain characteristics. RESULTS: In total, 71 studies reported in 74 papers were eligible for inclusion. The overall meta-analysis included 5877 participants and showed reductions in pain favouring exercise (standardised mean difference - 0.45; 95% confidence interval - 0.62, - 0.28). For most (> 82%) of the subgroup analyses, the direction of effect favoured exercise compared with usual care, with effect sizes ranging from small to large (median effect size - 0.35; range - 0.03 to - 1.17). The overall strength of evidence for the effect of exercise on cancer-related pain was very low. CONCLUSION: The findings provide support that exercise participation does not worsen cancer-related pain and that it may be beneficial. Better pain categorisation and inclusion of more diverse cancer populations in future research would improve understanding of the extent of benefit and to whom. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021266826.

Acute Inflammatory Responses to Exercise in Patients with Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

PURPOSE: Inflammation and extracellular matrix degeneration contribute to abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) development. We aimed to assess the effect of exercise intensity on circulating biomarkers of inflammation and extracellular matrix degeneration in patients with AAA and healthy older adults. METHODS: Twenty patients with AAA (74 ± 6 yr) and 20 healthy males (72 ± 5 yr) completed moderate-intensity cycling at 40% peak power output, higher-intensity intervals at 70% peak power output, and control (rest) on separate days. Circulating matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9), transforming growth factor beta 1, interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-10, and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) were analyzed at rest and 0 to 90 min postexercise. RESULTS: Biomarkers at baseline were similar between groups. IL-6 responses to exercise were similar between groups, with a greater increase in ΔIL-6 after moderate-intensity compared with higher-intensity exercise (P < 0.001). Delta MMP-9 showed a 118-ng·mL (95% confidence interval = 23 to 214, P = 0.02) greater increase immediately after higher-intensity exercise compared with changes in control in both groups. Delta MMP-9 then decreased by 114 ng·mL (18 to 211, P = 0.02) 90 min after higher-intensity exercise compared with the changes in control. Delta TNF-α was not different between protocols in healthy adults. In patients with AAA, delta TNF-α showed a greater decrease after higher-intensity compared with moderate-intensity exercise (-6.1 pg·mL, -8.5 to -3.6, P < 0.001) and control (-4.9 pg·mL, -7.4 to -2.4, P < 0.001). IL-10 and transforming growth factor beta 1 did not change in either group. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that a bout of higher-intensity exercise elicits a greater anti-inflammatory response compared with moderate-intensity exercise, which may be further augmented in patients with AAA. Exercise-induced reductions in biomarkers associated with AAA progression may represent a protective effect of exercise in patients with AAA.