Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
Variability in resistance training trajectories of breast cancer patients undergoing therapy.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Koeppel Maximilian, Steindorf Karen, Schmidt Martina E, Rosenberger Friederike, Wiskemann Joachim
Аннотация
PURPOSE: In resistance training (RT), the change in volume-load from training sessions (TS) to TS is an indicator of training progress. Resulting growth trajectories are likely to differ between individuals. Understanding this variation is important for exercise planning in general, but even more for clinical populations. We investigated this variation in breast cancer patients undergoing treatment.
METHODS: Data of 69 patients from two randomized controlled trails were investigated. They conducted a 12-week RT program. We fitted a quadratic Bayesian regression model to the baseline standardized volume-load over the course of the intervention. We allowed all parameters to vary both between exercises and between individuals.
RESULTS: We observed a positive linear component of 0.093 (95% uncertainty interval (UI) 0.058 to 0.120) and a negative quadratic component of - 0.002 (95% UI -0.008 to 0.001) for the mean trajectory of the change in volume-load. For the different exercises, we observed a dispersion for both the linear (0.043, 95% UI 0.018 to 0.082) and the quadratic component (0.002, 95% UI < 0.001 to 0.004). Variation between individual appears to be approximately four times larger. We also observed between-exercise variation within individuals. Extrapolation of the regression model indicates training progression stagnates after 20.6 TS (95% UI 14.8 to 44.4).
CONCLUSION: There is substantial variation in RT response between breast cancer patients undergoing tumor therapy and in-between exercises. The non-linear trajectory indicates that training progression will eventually plateau, demanding periodization and timely modification.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: BEATE Study: NCT01106820, Date: April 20, 2010; BEST Study: NCT01468766, Date: November 9, 2011.
METHODS: Data of 69 patients from two randomized controlled trails were investigated. They conducted a 12-week RT program. We fitted a quadratic Bayesian regression model to the baseline standardized volume-load over the course of the intervention. We allowed all parameters to vary both between exercises and between individuals.
RESULTS: We observed a positive linear component of 0.093 (95% uncertainty interval (UI) 0.058 to 0.120) and a negative quadratic component of - 0.002 (95% UI -0.008 to 0.001) for the mean trajectory of the change in volume-load. For the different exercises, we observed a dispersion for both the linear (0.043, 95% UI 0.018 to 0.082) and the quadratic component (0.002, 95% UI < 0.001 to 0.004). Variation between individual appears to be approximately four times larger. We also observed between-exercise variation within individuals. Extrapolation of the regression model indicates training progression stagnates after 20.6 TS (95% UI 14.8 to 44.4).
CONCLUSION: There is substantial variation in RT response between breast cancer patients undergoing tumor therapy and in-between exercises. The non-linear trajectory indicates that training progression will eventually plateau, demanding periodization and timely modification.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: BEATE Study: NCT01106820, Date: April 20, 2010; BEST Study: NCT01468766, Date: November 9, 2011.