A Systematic Review of Exercise Systematic Reviews in the Cancer Literature (2005-2017)

Nicole L. Stout, Jennifer Baima, Anne K. Swisher, Kerri Winters-Stone, Judith Welsh

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

40 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Evidence supports the benefits of exercise for patients with cancer; however, specific guidance for clinical decision making regarding exercise timing, frequency, duration, and intensity is lacking. Efforts are needed to optimize clinical recommendations for exercise in the cancer population. Objectives To aggregate information regarding the benefit of exercise through a systematic review of existing systematic reviews in the cancer exercise literature. Data Sources PubMed, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Study Eligibility Criteria Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the impact of movement-based exercise on the adult cancer population. Methods Two author teams reviewed 302 abstracts for inclusion with 93 selected for full-text review. A total of 53 studies were analyzed. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) was used as a quality measure of the reviews. Information was extracted using the PICO format (ie, participants, intervention, comparison, outcomes). Descriptive findings are reported. Results Mean AMSTAR score = 7.66/11 (±2.04) suggests moderate quality of the systematic reviews. Exercise is beneficial before, during, and after cancer treatment, across all cancer types, and for a variety of cancer-related impairments. Moderate-to-vigorous exercise is the best level of exercise intensity to improve physical function and mitigate cancer-related impairments. Therapeutic exercises are beneficial to manage treatment side effects, may enhance tolerance to cancer treatments, and improve functional outcomes. Supervised exercise yielded superior benefits versus unsupervised. Serious adverse events were not common. Limitations Movement-based exercise intervention outcomes are reported. No analysis of pooled effects was calculated across reviews due to significant heterogeneity within the systematic reviews. Findings do not consider exercise in advanced cancers or pediatric populations. Conclusions Exercise promotes significant improvements in clinical, functional, and in some populations, survival outcomes and can be recommended regardless of the type of cancer. Although generally safe, patients should be screened and appropriate precautions taken. Efforts to strengthen uniformity in clinical trial reporting, develop clinical practice guidelines, and integrate exercise and rehabilitation services into the cancer delivery system are needed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)S347-S384
JournalPM and R
Volume9
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2017

Fingerprint

Exercise
Neoplasms
Population
Exercise Therapy
Information Storage and Retrieval
Therapeutics
Practice Guidelines
PubMed
Meta-Analysis
Clinical Trials
Pediatrics
Survival

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
  • Rehabilitation
  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

A Systematic Review of Exercise Systematic Reviews in the Cancer Literature (2005-2017). / Stout, Nicole L.; Baima, Jennifer; Swisher, Anne K.; Winters-Stone, Kerri; Welsh, Judith.

In: PM and R, Vol. 9, No. 9, 01.09.2017, p. S347-S384.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Stout, Nicole L. ; Baima, Jennifer ; Swisher, Anne K. ; Winters-Stone, Kerri ; Welsh, Judith. / A Systematic Review of Exercise Systematic Reviews in the Cancer Literature (2005-2017). In: PM and R. 2017 ; Vol. 9, No. 9. pp. S347-S384.
@article{9669cd6ed4c340a3931232a947fad305,
title = "A Systematic Review of Exercise Systematic Reviews in the Cancer Literature (2005-2017)",
abstract = "Background Evidence supports the benefits of exercise for patients with cancer; however, specific guidance for clinical decision making regarding exercise timing, frequency, duration, and intensity is lacking. Efforts are needed to optimize clinical recommendations for exercise in the cancer population. Objectives To aggregate information regarding the benefit of exercise through a systematic review of existing systematic reviews in the cancer exercise literature. Data Sources PubMed, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Study Eligibility Criteria Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the impact of movement-based exercise on the adult cancer population. Methods Two author teams reviewed 302 abstracts for inclusion with 93 selected for full-text review. A total of 53 studies were analyzed. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) was used as a quality measure of the reviews. Information was extracted using the PICO format (ie, participants, intervention, comparison, outcomes). Descriptive findings are reported. Results Mean AMSTAR score = 7.66/11 (±2.04) suggests moderate quality of the systematic reviews. Exercise is beneficial before, during, and after cancer treatment, across all cancer types, and for a variety of cancer-related impairments. Moderate-to-vigorous exercise is the best level of exercise intensity to improve physical function and mitigate cancer-related impairments. Therapeutic exercises are beneficial to manage treatment side effects, may enhance tolerance to cancer treatments, and improve functional outcomes. Supervised exercise yielded superior benefits versus unsupervised. Serious adverse events were not common. Limitations Movement-based exercise intervention outcomes are reported. No analysis of pooled effects was calculated across reviews due to significant heterogeneity within the systematic reviews. Findings do not consider exercise in advanced cancers or pediatric populations. Conclusions Exercise promotes significant improvements in clinical, functional, and in some populations, survival outcomes and can be recommended regardless of the type of cancer. Although generally safe, patients should be screened and appropriate precautions taken. Efforts to strengthen uniformity in clinical trial reporting, develop clinical practice guidelines, and integrate exercise and rehabilitation services into the cancer delivery system are needed.",
author = "Stout, {Nicole L.} and Jennifer Baima and Swisher, {Anne K.} and Kerri Winters-Stone and Judith Welsh",
year = "2017",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.pmrj.2017.07.074",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
pages = "S347--S384",
journal = "PM and R",
issn = "1934-1482",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Systematic Review of Exercise Systematic Reviews in the Cancer Literature (2005-2017)

AU - Stout, Nicole L.

AU - Baima, Jennifer

AU - Swisher, Anne K.

AU - Winters-Stone, Kerri

AU - Welsh, Judith

PY - 2017/9/1

Y1 - 2017/9/1

N2 - Background Evidence supports the benefits of exercise for patients with cancer; however, specific guidance for clinical decision making regarding exercise timing, frequency, duration, and intensity is lacking. Efforts are needed to optimize clinical recommendations for exercise in the cancer population. Objectives To aggregate information regarding the benefit of exercise through a systematic review of existing systematic reviews in the cancer exercise literature. Data Sources PubMed, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Study Eligibility Criteria Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the impact of movement-based exercise on the adult cancer population. Methods Two author teams reviewed 302 abstracts for inclusion with 93 selected for full-text review. A total of 53 studies were analyzed. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) was used as a quality measure of the reviews. Information was extracted using the PICO format (ie, participants, intervention, comparison, outcomes). Descriptive findings are reported. Results Mean AMSTAR score = 7.66/11 (±2.04) suggests moderate quality of the systematic reviews. Exercise is beneficial before, during, and after cancer treatment, across all cancer types, and for a variety of cancer-related impairments. Moderate-to-vigorous exercise is the best level of exercise intensity to improve physical function and mitigate cancer-related impairments. Therapeutic exercises are beneficial to manage treatment side effects, may enhance tolerance to cancer treatments, and improve functional outcomes. Supervised exercise yielded superior benefits versus unsupervised. Serious adverse events were not common. Limitations Movement-based exercise intervention outcomes are reported. No analysis of pooled effects was calculated across reviews due to significant heterogeneity within the systematic reviews. Findings do not consider exercise in advanced cancers or pediatric populations. Conclusions Exercise promotes significant improvements in clinical, functional, and in some populations, survival outcomes and can be recommended regardless of the type of cancer. Although generally safe, patients should be screened and appropriate precautions taken. Efforts to strengthen uniformity in clinical trial reporting, develop clinical practice guidelines, and integrate exercise and rehabilitation services into the cancer delivery system are needed.

AB - Background Evidence supports the benefits of exercise for patients with cancer; however, specific guidance for clinical decision making regarding exercise timing, frequency, duration, and intensity is lacking. Efforts are needed to optimize clinical recommendations for exercise in the cancer population. Objectives To aggregate information regarding the benefit of exercise through a systematic review of existing systematic reviews in the cancer exercise literature. Data Sources PubMed, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Study Eligibility Criteria Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the impact of movement-based exercise on the adult cancer population. Methods Two author teams reviewed 302 abstracts for inclusion with 93 selected for full-text review. A total of 53 studies were analyzed. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) was used as a quality measure of the reviews. Information was extracted using the PICO format (ie, participants, intervention, comparison, outcomes). Descriptive findings are reported. Results Mean AMSTAR score = 7.66/11 (±2.04) suggests moderate quality of the systematic reviews. Exercise is beneficial before, during, and after cancer treatment, across all cancer types, and for a variety of cancer-related impairments. Moderate-to-vigorous exercise is the best level of exercise intensity to improve physical function and mitigate cancer-related impairments. Therapeutic exercises are beneficial to manage treatment side effects, may enhance tolerance to cancer treatments, and improve functional outcomes. Supervised exercise yielded superior benefits versus unsupervised. Serious adverse events were not common. Limitations Movement-based exercise intervention outcomes are reported. No analysis of pooled effects was calculated across reviews due to significant heterogeneity within the systematic reviews. Findings do not consider exercise in advanced cancers or pediatric populations. Conclusions Exercise promotes significant improvements in clinical, functional, and in some populations, survival outcomes and can be recommended regardless of the type of cancer. Although generally safe, patients should be screened and appropriate precautions taken. Efforts to strengthen uniformity in clinical trial reporting, develop clinical practice guidelines, and integrate exercise and rehabilitation services into the cancer delivery system are needed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85029957283&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85029957283&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.pmrj.2017.07.074

DO - 10.1016/j.pmrj.2017.07.074

M3 - Review article

C2 - 28942909

AN - SCOPUS:85029957283

VL - 9

SP - S347-S384

JO - PM and R

JF - PM and R

SN - 1934-1482

IS - 9

ER -