Rogers Laura Q, Midthune Douglas, Dodd Kevin, Bowles Heather, McAuley Edward, Courneya Kerry S, Barrett Brian, Razis Spiro, Hunter Gary R, Carter Stephen J, Carroll Raymond J, Kipnis Victor
Division of General Internal Medicine and Population Science, Department of Medicine, Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2ndAve S, MT 614, Birmingham, AL 35294-4410, Birmingham, AL, USA.
O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center at UAB, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2025 May 26;22(1):59. doi: 10.1186/s12966-025-01760-5.
Physical activity reduces morbidity and mortality risk in cancer survivors, but a meaningful proportion of this vulnerable population are physically inactive. Targeted interventions can help cancer survivors adopt a more active lifestyle, but the efficacy of these interventions must be rigorously evaluated in randomized controlled intervention trials. A major barrier to such trials involves the difficulty in obtaining unbiased estimates of physical activity in free-living conditions.
We conducted a randomized controlled trial of a 3-month intervention designed to increase physical activity vs. usual care in breast cancer survivors (n = 316). The primary outcome was change in physical activity as estimated by hip-worn accelerometer (MTI/Actigraph, models GT1M and GT3X). The trial included a sub-study (n = 106) wherein unbiased measures of total energy expenditure (doubly labeled water), and resting energy expenditure (indirect calorimetry) were collected. A linear mixed measurement error model characterized the structure of measurement error in accelerometry-estimated physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE), and corrected for bias in the estimated intervention effect due to measurement error.
Bias in the accelerometer estimates was related to true PAEE (p < 0.001) and baseline body mass index (p < 0.001) but was not related to age (p = 0.13). After correcting for measurement error, the estimated intervention effect at 3 months (change from baseline in PAEE in the intervention arm minus change in the control arm) was 77 kcal/day (95% confidence interval (CI) = 31-125), compared to 48 kcal/day (95% CI = 22-75) when measurement error was ignored. These results indicate a 20% (21%) increase in PAEE kcal x d (kcal x kg × d) at month 3 relative to baseline for the corrected model vs. 14% (15%) for the uncorrected model. There was no evidence that measurement error in accelerometry-estimated PAEE was differential (differed by treatment arm) in the trial (p = 0.86).
Measurement error in accelerometer-estimated PAEE can attenuate the effect size related to intervention effects in randomized controlled trials of physical activity interventions. Sub-studies that collect unbiased measures of PAEE can be used to correct for this short-coming.
ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT00929617; registered 06/26/2009; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00929617.
体育活动可降低癌症幸存者的发病和死亡风险,但这一弱势群体中有相当一部分人缺乏身体活动。有针对性的干预措施有助于癌症幸存者采取更积极的生活方式,但这些干预措施的效果必须在随机对照干预试验中进行严格评估。此类试验的一个主要障碍是难以在自由生活条件下获得无偏倚的身体活动估计值。
我们对316名乳腺癌幸存者进行了一项为期3个月的干预措施与常规护理的随机对照试验。主要结局是通过佩戴在髋部的加速度计(MTI/Actigraph,GT1M和GT3X型号)估计的身体活动变化。该试验包括一项子研究(n = 106),其中收集了总能量消耗(双标水法)和静息能量消耗(间接测热法)的无偏测量值。线性混合测量误差模型表征了加速度计估计的身体活动能量消耗(PAEE)测量误差的结构,并校正了由于测量误差导致的估计干预效果偏差。
加速度计估计值的偏差与真实PAEE(p < 0.001)和基线体重指数(p < 0.001)有关,但与年龄无关(p = 0.13)。校正测量误差后,3个月时的估计干预效果(干预组PAEE相对于基线的变化减去对照组的变化)为77千卡/天(95%置信区间(CI)= 31 - 125),而忽略测量误差时为48千卡/天(95% CI = 22 - 75)。这些结果表明,校正模型在第3个月时相对于基线,PAEE千卡×天(千卡×千克×天)增加了20%(21%),而未校正模型为14%(15%)。在该试验中,没有证据表明加速度计估计的PAEE测量误差存在差异(因治疗组而异)(p = 0.86)。
加速度计估计的PAEE测量误差可减弱体育活动干预随机对照试验中与干预效果相关的效应大小。收集PAEE无偏测量值的子研究可用于校正这一缺点。
ClinicalTrials.gov;NCT00929617;2009年6月26日注册;https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00929617 。