Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Br J Sports Med. 2019 Jul;53(13):812. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2018-099191. Epub 2018 Sep 4.
OBJECTIVE: To optimally target exercise interventions for patients with cancer, it is important to identify which patients benefit from which interventions. DESIGN: We conducted an individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate demographic, clinical, intervention-related and exercise-related moderators of exercise intervention effects on physical fitness in patients with cancer. DATA SOURCES: We identified relevant studies via systematic searches in electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We analysed data from 28 randomised controlled trials investigating the effects of exercise on upper body muscle strength (UBMS) and lower body muscle strength (LBMS), lower body muscle function (LBMF) and aerobic fitness in adult patients with cancer. RESULTS: Exercise significantly improved UBMS (β=0.20, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.14 to 0.26), LBMS (β=0.29, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.35), LBMF (β=0.16, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.24) and aerobic fitness (β=0.28, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.34), with larger effects for supervised interventions. Exercise effects on UBMS were larger during treatment, when supervised interventions included ≥3 sessions per week, when resistance exercises were included and when session duration was >60 min. Exercise effects on LBMS were larger for patients who were living alone, for supervised interventions including resistance exercise and when session duration was >60 min. Exercise effects on aerobic fitness were larger for younger patients and when supervised interventions included aerobic exercise. CONCLUSION: Exercise interventions during and following cancer treatment had small effects on UBMS, LBMS, LBMF and aerobic fitness. Demographic, intervention-related and exercise-related characteristics including age, marital status, intervention timing, delivery mode and frequency and type and time of exercise sessions moderated the exercise effect on UBMS, LBMS and aerobic fitness.
目的:为了使针对癌症患者的运动干预措施达到最佳效果,确定哪些患者从哪些干预措施中获益非常重要。
设计:我们进行了一项个体患者数据荟萃分析,以研究癌症患者的运动干预措施对身体适应性的影响与患者的人口统计学、临床、干预相关和运动相关因素之间的关系。
数据来源:我们通过电子数据库(PubMed、Embase、PsycINFO 和 CINAHL)的系统检索确定了相关研究。
入选标准:我们分析了 28 项随机对照试验的数据,这些试验研究了运动对上臂肌肉力量(UBMS)、下肢肌肉力量(LBMS)、下肢肌肉功能(LBMF)和有氧运动能力的影响,纳入的患者均为成年癌症患者。
结果:运动显著改善了 UBMS(β=0.20,95%置信区间(CI)0.14 至 0.26)、LBMS(β=0.29,95% CI 0.23 至 0.35)、LBMF(β=0.16,95% CI 0.08 至 0.24)和有氧适能(β=0.28,95% CI 0.23 至 0.34),其中监督干预的效果更大。治疗期间、监督干预每周≥3 次、包括阻力运动以及每次运动时间>60 分钟时,运动对 UBMS 的效果更大。当患者独居、监督干预包括阻力运动以及每次运动时间>60 分钟时,运动对 LBMS 的效果更大。当患者年龄较小且监督干预包括有氧运动时,运动对有氧适能的效果更大。
结论:癌症治疗期间和之后的运动干预措施对 UBMS、LBMS、LBMF 和有氧适能仅有较小的影响。人口统计学、干预相关和运动相关特征(包括年龄、婚姻状况、干预时机、实施模式和频率、运动方式和时间)调节了运动对 UBMS、LBMS 和有氧适能的效果。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013-4-30
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013-9-24
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2025-6-28
J Clin Med. 2025-5-26
Support Care Cancer. 2025-1-8