High-intensity interval training in the therapy and aftercare of cancer patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Standard

High-intensity interval training in the therapy and aftercare of cancer patients : a systematic review with meta-analysis. / Mugele, Hendrik; Freitag, Nils; Wilhelmi, Jannik; Yang, Yanxiang; Cheng, Sulin; Bloch, Wilhelm; Schumann, Moritz.

In: Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, Vol. 13, No. 2, 26.02.2019, p. 205-223.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{c3e691d8714540519f3532a8c2092ced,
title = "High-intensity interval training in the therapy and aftercare of cancer patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis",
abstract = "PURPOSE: This review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) compared to usual care (UC) or moderate-intensity training (MIE) on physical fitness and health-related outcomes in cancer patients across all stages of therapy and aftercare.METHODS: Databases were systematically searched in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines until October 4th, 2018. Eligibility criteria included adult patients of various cancer types, performing HIIT vs. UC or MIE. Outcomes of interest included physical fitness (cardiorespiratory fitness [VO2peak] and functional capacity) and health-related outcomes (body composition, quality of life, cancer-related fatigue, and blood-borne biomarkers). Mean differences (MD) were calculated and pooled to generate effect sizes for VO2peak.RESULTS: The search identified 1453 studies, out of which 12 articles were included. The average duration of interventions was 6.7 ± 3.0 weeks, with 2.8 ± 0.5 sessions per week. The meta-analysis for VO2peak showed superiority of HIIT compared to UC (MD 3.73; 95{\%} CI 2.07, 5.39; p < 0.001) but not MIE (MD 1.36; 95{\%} CI - 1.62, 4.35; p = 0.370). Similarly, no superior effects of HIIT compared to MIE were found for quality of life or changes in lean mass, while evidence was provided for a larger reduction in fat mass.CONCLUSION: This systematic review showed that short-term HIIT induces similar positive effects on physical fitness and health-related outcomes as MIE but seems to be superior compared to UC. Thus, HIIT might be a time-efficient intervention for cancer patients across all stages of therapy and aftercare.IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is superior compared to usucal care in improving physical fitness and health-related outcomes in cancer patients across all stages of therapy and aftercare. Currently, there is no evidence for the benefits of HIIT compared to aerobic training of moderate intensity (MIE) for changes in cardiorespiratory fitness, lean mass and patient-reported outcomes. Reductions in fat mass may be more pronounced in HIIT compared to MIE when training is performed in aftercare.",
keywords = "Journal Article, Review",
author = "Hendrik Mugele and Nils Freitag and Jannik Wilhelmi and Yanxiang Yang and Sulin Cheng and Wilhelm Bloch and Moritz Schumann",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "26",
doi = "10.1007/s11764-019-00743-3",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "205--223",
journal = "Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice",
issn = "1932-2259",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - High-intensity interval training in the therapy and aftercare of cancer patients

T2 - Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice

AU - Mugele, Hendrik

AU - Freitag, Nils

AU - Wilhelmi, Jannik

AU - Yang, Yanxiang

AU - Cheng, Sulin

AU - Bloch, Wilhelm

AU - Schumann, Moritz

PY - 2019/2/26

Y1 - 2019/2/26

N2 - PURPOSE: This review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) compared to usual care (UC) or moderate-intensity training (MIE) on physical fitness and health-related outcomes in cancer patients across all stages of therapy and aftercare.METHODS: Databases were systematically searched in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines until October 4th, 2018. Eligibility criteria included adult patients of various cancer types, performing HIIT vs. UC or MIE. Outcomes of interest included physical fitness (cardiorespiratory fitness [VO2peak] and functional capacity) and health-related outcomes (body composition, quality of life, cancer-related fatigue, and blood-borne biomarkers). Mean differences (MD) were calculated and pooled to generate effect sizes for VO2peak.RESULTS: The search identified 1453 studies, out of which 12 articles were included. The average duration of interventions was 6.7 ± 3.0 weeks, with 2.8 ± 0.5 sessions per week. The meta-analysis for VO2peak showed superiority of HIIT compared to UC (MD 3.73; 95% CI 2.07, 5.39; p < 0.001) but not MIE (MD 1.36; 95% CI - 1.62, 4.35; p = 0.370). Similarly, no superior effects of HIIT compared to MIE were found for quality of life or changes in lean mass, while evidence was provided for a larger reduction in fat mass.CONCLUSION: This systematic review showed that short-term HIIT induces similar positive effects on physical fitness and health-related outcomes as MIE but seems to be superior compared to UC. Thus, HIIT might be a time-efficient intervention for cancer patients across all stages of therapy and aftercare.IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is superior compared to usucal care in improving physical fitness and health-related outcomes in cancer patients across all stages of therapy and aftercare. Currently, there is no evidence for the benefits of HIIT compared to aerobic training of moderate intensity (MIE) for changes in cardiorespiratory fitness, lean mass and patient-reported outcomes. Reductions in fat mass may be more pronounced in HIIT compared to MIE when training is performed in aftercare.

AB - PURPOSE: This review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) compared to usual care (UC) or moderate-intensity training (MIE) on physical fitness and health-related outcomes in cancer patients across all stages of therapy and aftercare.METHODS: Databases were systematically searched in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines until October 4th, 2018. Eligibility criteria included adult patients of various cancer types, performing HIIT vs. UC or MIE. Outcomes of interest included physical fitness (cardiorespiratory fitness [VO2peak] and functional capacity) and health-related outcomes (body composition, quality of life, cancer-related fatigue, and blood-borne biomarkers). Mean differences (MD) were calculated and pooled to generate effect sizes for VO2peak.RESULTS: The search identified 1453 studies, out of which 12 articles were included. The average duration of interventions was 6.7 ± 3.0 weeks, with 2.8 ± 0.5 sessions per week. The meta-analysis for VO2peak showed superiority of HIIT compared to UC (MD 3.73; 95% CI 2.07, 5.39; p < 0.001) but not MIE (MD 1.36; 95% CI - 1.62, 4.35; p = 0.370). Similarly, no superior effects of HIIT compared to MIE were found for quality of life or changes in lean mass, while evidence was provided for a larger reduction in fat mass.CONCLUSION: This systematic review showed that short-term HIIT induces similar positive effects on physical fitness and health-related outcomes as MIE but seems to be superior compared to UC. Thus, HIIT might be a time-efficient intervention for cancer patients across all stages of therapy and aftercare.IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is superior compared to usucal care in improving physical fitness and health-related outcomes in cancer patients across all stages of therapy and aftercare. Currently, there is no evidence for the benefits of HIIT compared to aerobic training of moderate intensity (MIE) for changes in cardiorespiratory fitness, lean mass and patient-reported outcomes. Reductions in fat mass may be more pronounced in HIIT compared to MIE when training is performed in aftercare.

KW - Journal Article

KW - Review

U2 - 10.1007/s11764-019-00743-3

DO - 10.1007/s11764-019-00743-3

M3 - Journal articles

VL - 13

SP - 205

EP - 223

JO - Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice

JF - Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice

SN - 1932-2259

IS - 2

ER -

ID: 3628372