Cochrane Haematology, Institute of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Department I of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Nov 28;11(11):CD015518. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015518.
Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is one of the most common symptoms associated with cancer and its treatment. Different types of exercise have demonstrated beneficial effects on CRF. Previous evidence syntheses provided promising but inconclusive results when focusing on the effects of resistance training.
To evaluate the effects of resistance training on CRF in people with cancer and, specifically, to compare the effects of resistance training with no training on CRF at: different periods of treatment in relation to anticancer therapy (before, during, or after anticancer therapy); different periods of assessment (up to 12 weeks after the intervention, between more than 12 weeks and less than six months after the intervention, or six months or longer after the intervention). Moreover, we wanted to compare the effects of resistance training with no training on quality of life (QoL), adverse events, depression, and anxiety.
We performed an extensive literature search in eight databases including CENTRAL, Medline, and Embase in October 2023. We searched trial registries for ongoing studies, and we integrated results from update searches of previously published Cochrane reviews.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared resistance training with no training in adults with any type of cancer who received resistance training initiated before, during, or after anticancer therapy. Eligible RCTs needed to evaluate CRF or QoL. Resistance training had to be structured, last for at least five sessions, and include face-to-face instruction. We excluded studies that randomised fewer than 20 participants per group.
We used standard Cochrane methodology. For analyses, we pooled short-term, medium-term, and long-term effects (i.e. up to 12 weeks, between more than 12 weeks and less than six months, and six months or longer, after the intervention). We assessed risk of bias and certainty of the evidence using Cochrane's risk of bias tool (RoB 1), and the GRADE approach, respectively.
We included 21 RCTs with a total of 2221 participants, with diverse types of cancer, who received resistance training initiated during (14 studies), or after (7 studies) anticancer therapy. None of the studies investigated the effects of resistance training initiated before anticancer therapy. Here, we present the results on CRF, QoL, and adverse events. Results on depression and anxiety are reported in the full review. Resistance training during anticancer therapy Resistance training probably has a beneficial effect compared with no training on short-term CRF (mean difference (MD) on Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Fatigue scale (FACIT-Fatigue) 3.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30 to 6.51; scale from 0 to 52, higher values mean better outcome, minimal important difference (MID) 3; 12 RCTs, 1120 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of resistance training compared with no training on medium-term CRF (MD on Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory -8.33, 95% CI -18.34 to 1.68; scale from 20 to 100, higher values mean worse outcome, MID 11.5; 1 RCT, 47 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of resistance training compared with no training on long-term CRF (MD on FACIT-Fatigue -0.70, 95% CI -4.16 to 2.76; 1 RCT, 133 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Resistance training may have a small beneficial effect compared with no training on short-term QoL (MD on EORTC QoL Questionnaire C30 - global health (QLQ-C30) 4.93, 95% CI 2.01 to 7.85; scale from 0 to 100, higher values mean better outcome, MID 10; 12 RCTs, 1117 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of resistance training compared with no training on medium-term QoL (MD on QLQ-C30 6.48, 95% CI -4.64 to 17.60; 1 RCT, 42 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of resistance training compared with no training on long-term QoL (MD on Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Anemia (FACT-An) 0.50, 95% CI -8.46 to 9.46; scale from 0 to 188; higher values mean better outcome, MID 7; 1 RCT, 133 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Only two RCTs (116 participants) reported data on adverse events for both the resistance training and the control arm. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of resistance training compared with no training on the occurrence of adverse events (very low-certainty evidence). Resistance training after anticancer therapy The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of resistance training compared with no training on short-term CRF (MD on Chalder Fatigue Scale -0.27, 95% CI -2.11 to 1.57; scale from 0 to 33, higher values mean worse outcome, MID 2.3; 3 RCTs, 174 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Resistance training may have a small beneficial effect or no effect compared with no training on short-term QoL (MD on QLQ-C30 3.87, 95% CI -1.22 to 8.97; 4 RCTs, 243 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies reported data on medium-, or long-term effects on CRF or QoL. Only three RCTs (238 participants) reported data on adverse events for both the resistance training and the control arm. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of resistance training compared with no training on the occurrence of adverse events (very low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our review demonstrates beneficial effects of resistance training during anticancer therapy compared with no training on short-term CRF and QoL for people with cancer. Resistance training after anticancer therapy may also have a small beneficial effect on short-term QoL. Data on medium-, and long-term effects are sparse. In order to facilitate evidence syntheses beyond a narrative report of the data, investigators of resistance training programmes should report adverse events more consistently and completely for all study arms, including control groups.
癌症相关疲劳 (CRF) 是与癌症及其治疗相关的最常见症状之一。不同类型的运动已被证明对 CRF 具有有益的影响。先前的证据综合提供了有希望但不确定的结果,重点是抗阻训练的效果。
评估抗阻训练对癌症患者 CRF 的影响,具体而言,比较抗阻训练与无训练在以下方面对 CRF 的影响:与抗癌治疗相关的不同治疗时期(治疗前、治疗期间或治疗后);不同的评估时期(干预后最多 12 周、干预后 12 周至不到 6 个月、干预后 6 个月或更长时间)。此外,我们还比较了抗阻训练与无训练对生活质量 (QoL)、不良事件、抑郁和焦虑的影响。
我们在 2023 年 10 月对包括 CENTRAL、Medline 和 Embase 在内的八个数据库进行了广泛的文献检索。我们在试验登记处搜索正在进行的研究,并整合了之前发表的 Cochrane 综述更新搜索的结果。
我们纳入了比较开始于抗癌治疗前、治疗期间或治疗后的任何类型癌症患者接受抗阻训练与无训练的随机对照试验 (RCT)。合格的 RCT 需要评估 CRF 或 QoL。抗阻训练必须是结构化的,持续至少五节课,并包括面对面的指导。我们排除了每组随机分配少于 20 名参与者的研究。
我们使用了标准的 Cochrane 方法。对于分析,我们汇总了短期、中期和长期效果(即干预后最多 12 周、干预后 12 周至不到 6 个月和干预后 6 个月或更长时间)。我们使用 Cochrane 的偏倚风险工具 (RoB 1) 和 GRADE 方法分别评估风险偏倚和证据确定性。
我们纳入了 21 项 RCT,共纳入 2221 名参与者,他们患有各种类型的癌症,并接受了开始于抗癌治疗期间 (14 项研究) 或治疗后 (7 项研究) 的抗阻训练。没有一项研究调查了开始于抗癌治疗前的抗阻训练的效果。在这里,我们介绍了 CRF、QoL 和不良事件的结果。抑郁和焦虑的结果在全文综述中报告。
与无训练相比,抗阻训练可能对短期 CRF 有有益的影响(功能性评估慢性疾病治疗-疲劳量表 (FACIT-Fatigue) 的平均差异 (MD) 为 3.90,95%置信区间 (CI) 为 1.30 至 6.51;量表范围为 0 至 52,较高的值表示更好的结果,最小重要差异 (MID) 为 3;12 项 RCT,1120 名参与者;中等确定性证据)。与无训练相比,抗阻训练对中期 CRF 的影响证据非常不确定(多维疲劳量表-8.33 的 MD,95%CI 为-18.34 至 1.68;量表范围为 20 至 100,较高的值表示较差的结果,MID 为 11.5;1 项 RCT,47 名参与者;极低确定性证据)。与无训练相比,抗阻训练对长期 CRF 的影响证据非常不确定(FACIT-Fatigue 的 MD 为-0.70,95%CI 为-4.16 至 2.76;1 项 RCT,133 名参与者;极低确定性证据)。与无训练相比,抗阻训练可能对短期 QoL 有较小的有益影响(EORTC QoL 问卷 C30-全球健康 (QLQ-C30) 的 MD 为 4.93,95%CI 为 2.01 至 7.85;量表范围为 0 至 100,较高的值表示更好的结果,MID 为 10;12 项 RCT,1117 名参与者;低确定性证据)。与无训练相比,抗阻训练对中期 QoL 的影响证据非常不确定(QLQ-C30 的 MD 为 6.48,95%CI 为-4.64 至 17.60;1 项 RCT,42 名参与者;极低确定性证据)。与无训练相比,抗阻训练对长期 QoL 的影响证据非常不确定(功能性癌症治疗贫血量表 (FACT-An) 的 MD 为 0.50,95%CI 为-8.46 至 9.46;量表范围为 0 至 188;较高的值表示更好的结果,MID 为 7;1 项 RCT,133 名参与者;极低确定性证据)。只有两项 RCT(116 名参与者)报告了抗阻训练和对照组的不良事件数据。与无训练相比,抗阻训练对不良事件发生的影响证据非常不确定(极低确定性证据)。
与无训练相比,抗阻训练可能对短期 CRF 有有益的影响(Chalder 疲劳量表的 MD 为-0.27,95%CI 为-2.11 至 1.57;量表范围为 0 至 33,较高的值表示较差的结果,MID 为 2.3;3 项 RCT,174 名参与者;极低确定性证据)。与无训练相比,抗阻训练可能对短期 QoL 有较小的有益影响或无影响(QLQ-C30 的 MD 为 3.87,95%CI 为 1.22 至 8.97;4 项 RCT,243 名参与者;低确定性证据)。没有研究报告关于中期或长期 CRF 或 QoL 的数据。只有三项 RCT(238 名参与者)报告了抗阻训练和对照组的不良事件数据。与无训练相比,抗阻训练对不良事件发生的影响证据非常不确定(极低确定性证据)。
我们的综述表明,与无训练相比,癌症患者抗癌治疗期间的抗阻训练对短期 CRF 和 QoL 有有益的影响。抗癌治疗后,抗阻训练可能对短期 QoL 也有较小的有益影响。关于中期和长期效果的数据很少。为了促进超越数据叙述性报告的证据综合,抗阻训练计划的研究者应更一致和完整地报告所有研究臂(包括对照组)的不良事件。