Rosalind R. Spence

Australian Association for Exercise and Sport Science Position Stand: Optimising Cancer Outcomes Through Exercise.

Cancer represents a major public health concern in Australia. Causes of cancer are multifactorial with lack of physical activity being considered one of the known risk factors, particularly for breast and colorectal cancers. Participating in exercise has also been associated with benefits during and following treatment for cancer, including improvements in psychosocial and physical outcomes, as well as better compliance with treatment regimens, reduced impact of disease symptoms and treatment-related side-effects, and survival benefits for particular cancers. The general exercise prescription for people undertaking or having completed cancer treatment is of low to moderate intensity, regular frequency (3-5 times/week) for at least 20 min per session, involving aerobic, resistance or mixed exercise types. Future work needs to push the boundaries of this exercise prescription, so that we can better understand what constitutes optimal, desirable and necessary frequency, duration, intensity and type, and how specific characteristics of the individual (e.g., age, cancer type, treatment, presence of specific symptoms) influence this prescription. What follows is a summary of the cancer and exercise literature, in particular the purpose of exercise following diagnosis of cancer, the potential benefits derived by cancer patients and survivors from participating in exercise programs, and exercise prescription guidelines and contraindications or considerations for exercise prescription with this special population. This report represents the position stand of the Australian Association of Exercise and Sport Science on exercise and cancer recovery and has the purpose of guiding exercise practitioners in their work with cancer patients.

Exercise and cancer rehabilitation: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION Cancer is increasingly being viewed as a chronic illness requiring long-term management, and there is a growing need for evidence-based rehabilitation interventions for cancer survivors. Previous reviews have evaluated the benefits of exercise interventions for patients undergoing cancer treatment and long-term survivors, but none have investigated the role of exercise during cancer rehabilitation, the period immediately following cancer treatment completion. This systematic review summarises the literature on the health effects of exercise during cancer rehabilitation and evaluates the methodological rigour of studies in this area to date. METHODS Relevant studies were identified through a systematic search of PubMed and Embase to April 2009. Data on study design, recruitment strategy, participants, exercise intervention, adherence rates, and outcomes were extracted. Methodological rigour was assessed using a structured rating system. RESULTS Ten studies were included. Breast cancer patients were the predominate patient group represented. Most interventions were aerobic or resistance-training exercise programmes, and exercise type, frequency, duration and intensity varied across studies. Improvements in physical functioning, strength, physical activity levels, quality of life, fatigue, immune function, haemoglobin concentrations, potential markers of recurrence, and body composition were reported. However, all studies were limited by incomplete reporting and methodological limitations. CONCLUSIONS Although the methodological limitations of studies in this new field must be acknowledged, initial evidence indicates that exercise is feasible and may provide physiological and psychological benefits for cancer survivors during the rehabilitation period. Future studies with rigorous study designs are now required to advance the field.

A systematic review of the association between physical activity and colorectal cancer risk

This review evaluated the strength of the evidence for a causal relationship between physical activity (PA) and colorectal cancer (CRC). A systematic review of databases through February 2008 was conducted to identify studies that assessed the association between total or recreational PA and incidence or mortality of CRC (including CRC, rectal cancer, colon cancer, and proximal or distal colon cancer). Studies were evaluated for significant associations between PA and risk of CRC endpoints and for evidence of dose–response relationships in the highest quality studies. Twenty cohort studies were evaluated; 11 were high‐quality. Fifty percent of all studies and 64% of highest quality studies reported at least one significant association between PA and risk of a CRC endpoint (P<0.05). However, only 28% of all analyses (31% of analyses of highest quality studies) were significant (P<0.05). Only 40% of analyses of highest quality studies resulted in a significant P for trend (P<0.05); however, a non‐significant inverse linear association between PA and colon cancer risk was apparent. Heterogeneity in the evidence from all studies and from the highest quality studies was evident. Evidence from cohort studies is not sufficient to claim a convincing relationship exists between PA and CRC risk.

Is Unsupervised Exercise Following Breast Cancer Safe for All Women

One in eight women living in developed countries will be diagnosed with breast cancer before the age of 85, with the mean age at first diagnosis approximately 60 years. Stage I represents just under 50% of diagnoses, while 45% of cases are diagnosed at later stages (stages II to IV; the remainder being unknown stage). Breast cancer continues to be the most common cause of cancer-related deaths in women , and although survival for women with stage I disease is high (98% 5-year relative survival), survival is significantly lower for those diagnosed with more advanced disease stage (i.e., stages II to IV, 83%; an unknown stage, 50%) .

Correction to: Exercise following breast cancer: exploratory survival analyses of two randomised, controlled trials

In the original publication of the article, under the heading Discussion, 1st paragraph, the sentence that reads as, “Nonetheless, our observed improvements of over 50% for OS and over 30% for DFS (HRs: 0.45 and 0.66, respectively) are consistent with results from other available studies” should read as “Nonetheless, our observed improvements of over 50% for OS and DFS (HRs: 0.45 and 0.66, respectively) are consistent with results from other available studies.” Under the heading Discussion, 3rd paragraph, the sentence that reads as “We cannot discount the possibility …such as education, income and access to care [1, 7]” should read as “We cannot discount the possibility…such as education, income and access to care, which ultimately have on survival outcomes [1, 7].”