BackgroundLife-threatening diseases have a negative impact on emotional well-being and psychosocial functioning. This study aimed to assess the relationship between the level of anxiety caused by a neoplasm and the threat of coronavirus infection among patients with cancer actively treated with systemic therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, we searched for clinical factors associated with a higher level of anxiety.MethodsIn this multicentre, prospective, non-interventional study conducted in Poland, we enrolled 306 actively treated patients with cancer and collected their clinical data, including age, gender, cancer type and treatment intention. The fear/anxiety of SARS-CoV-2 were rated in Fear of COVID-19 Scale (SRA-FCV-19S) and Numerical Anxiety Scale (SRA-NAS). The fear and anxiety associated with cancer (CRA) were rated with the NAS (CRA-NAS).ResultsThe mean level of SRA-FCV-19S was 18.5±7.44, which was correlated with the SRA-NAS (r=0.741, p<0.001). SRA-FCV-19S was significantly higher in women versus men (20.18±7.56 vs 16.54±6.83; p<0.001) and was tumour type-dependent (p=0.037), with the highest anxiety observed in patients with breast cancer (17.63±8.75). In the multivariate analysis, only the female gender was significantly associated with higher SRA. CRA-NAS was higher in women versus men (7.07±2.99 vs 5.47±3.01; p<0.001), in patients treated with curative versus palliative intention (7.14±3.06 vs 5.99±3.06; p=0.01) and in individuals aged ≤65 years versus >65 years (6.73±2.96 vs 5.66±3.24; p=0.007).ConclusionsFor an actively treated patient with cancer, cancer remains the main life-threatening disease during the COVID-19 pandemic. The need for more attentive psychological care should be provided especially to female patients, patients with breast cancer, those under 65 years of age and treated with curative intention, as these factors are associated with a higher level of anxiety.

Recently developed COVID-19 vaccines significantly reduce the risk of severe coronavirus disease, which is essential in the particularly vulnerable cancer patient population. There is a growing anti-vaccine concern that may affect the success of the fight against the SARS-CoV2 pandemic. To evaluate opinions and attitudes toward vaccination, we conducted an anonymous online survey among Polish patients diagnosed with cancer. We analyzed how socio-demographic factors, type of cancer, comorbidities, previous influenza vaccinations, and information sources affect the general willingness and opinions about vaccinations, emphasizing vaccination against COVID-19. Six hundred thirty-five patients (80.2% female) participated in the study. A positive attitude towards vaccination was presented by 73.7%, neutral by 17.8%, while negative by 8.5%. Willingness to get vaccinated was declared by 60.3%, 23.5% were unwilling, and 16.2% were undecided. Significant predictors of willingness were education, marital status, active anti-cancer treatment, previous influenza vaccination, and positive attitude towards vaccinations. Patients with cancer have concerns regarding safety, effectiveness, and the process of development of the COVID-19 vaccine. Overall, patients with cancer present positive attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination but required sufficient information on its efficacy and side effects.

Purpose The main goal of this study was to assess the acute effects of 3 and 6 mg of caffeine intake per kg of body mass (b.m.) on maximal strength and strength-endurance in women habituated to caffeine. Methods Twenty-one healthy resistance-trained female students (23.0 ± 0.9 years, body mass: 59.0 ± 6.6 kg), with a daily caffeine intake of 5.8 ± 2.6 mg/kg/b.m. participated in a randomized, crossover, double-blind design. Each participant performed three experimental sessions after ingesting either a placebo (PLAC) or 3 mg/kg/b.m. (CAF-3) and 6 mg/kg/b.m. (CAF-6) of caffeine. In each experimental session, the participants underwent a 1RM test and a strength-endurance test at 50 %1RM in the bench press exercise. Maximal load was measured in the 1RM test and the time under tension, number of preformed repetitions, power output and bar velocity were registered in the strength-endurance test. Results The one-way ANOVA showed a main effect of caffeine on 1RM bench press performance (F = 14.74; p < 0.01). In comparison to the PLAC (40.48 ± 9.21 kg), CAF-3 (41.68 ± 8.98 kg; p = 0.01) and CAF-6 (42.98 ± 8.79 kg; p < 0.01) increased 1RM bench press test results. There was also a significant increase in 1RM for CAF-6 when compared to CAF-3 (p < 0.01). There was a main effect of caffeine on time under tension during the strength-endurance test (F = 13.09; p < 0.01). In comparison to the PLAC (53.52 ± 11.44 s), CAF-6 (61.76 ± 15.39 s; p < 0.01) significantly increased the time under tension during the maximal strength-endurance test. Conclusion An acute dose of 3-to-6 mg/kg/b.m. of caffeine improves maximum strength. However, these doses of caffeine had minimal ergogenic effect on strength-endurance performance in women habituated to caffeine.

Purpose Previous investigations have found positive effects of acute ingestion of capsules containing 4-to-9 mg of caffeine per kg of body mass on several aspects of judo performance. However, no previous investigation has tested the effectiveness of caffeinated chewing gum as the form of caffeine administration for judoists. The main goal of this study was to assess the effect of acute ingestion of a caffeinated chewing gum on the results of the special judo fitness test (SJFT). Methods Nine male elite judo athletes of the Polish national team (23.7 ± 4.4 years, body mass: 73.5 ± 7.4 kg) participated in a randomized, crossover, placebo-controlled and double-blind experiment. Participants were moderate caffeine consumers (3.1 mg/kg/day). Each athlete performed three identical experimental sessions after: (a) ingestion of two non-caffeinated chewing gums (P + P); (b) a caffeinated chewing gum and a placebo chewing gum (C + P; ~2.7 mg/kg); (c) two caffeinated chewing gums (C + C; ~5.4 mg/kg). Each gum was ingested 15 min before performing two Special Judo Fitness Test (SJFT) which were separated by 4 min of combat activity. Results The total number of throws was not different between P + P, C + P, and C + C (59.66 ± 4.15, 62.22 ± 4.32, 60.22 ± 4.08 throws, respectively; p = 0.41). A two-way repeated measures ANOVA indicated no significant substance × time interaction effect as well as no main effect of caffeine for SJFT performance, SJFT index, blood lactate concentration, heart rate or rating of perceived exertion. Conclusions The results of the current study indicate that the use of caffeinated chewing gum in a dose up to 5.4 mg/kg of caffeine did not increase performance during repeated SJFTs.

No abstract

Background:The main goal of the presented study was to assess the effect of blood flow restriction (BFR) on the maximum number of repetitions in the bench press exercise (BP) with different movement tempos.Material and methods: Four female athletes volunteered for the study. The experiment was performed following a randomized crossover design, with four different testing protocols: 2/0/X/0 fast tempo with BFR (FAST BFR ); 2/0/X/0 fast tempo without BFR (FAST NO-BFR ); 6/0/X/0 slow tempo with BFR (SLOW BFR ) or 6/0/X/0 slow tempo without BFR (SLOW NO-BFR ). During the experimental session, participants performed 5 sets of the BP at 80%1RM. The following variables were recorded: the maximal number of repetitions in every set (REP Set1-5 ) and the total number of repetitions performed in 5 sets (TREP). Two-way ANOVA was used to show differences between variables.Results: There were significant differences between FAST NO-BFR and SLOW NO-BFR , between FAST BFR and SLOW BFR variables in REP Set1-5 (p < 0.05) and TREP (p < 0.01). Similarly, there were significant differences between FAST NO-BFR and FAST BFR variables in REP Set1,2,5 (p < 0.05) and TREP. Significant differences between SLOW NO-BFR and SLOW BFR variables were also found in REP Set1,5 (p < 0.05), as well as in TREP (p < 0.01). Conclusions:The use of BFR in resistance training improves the maximal number of REP during the BP.

The resistance training volume along with the exercise range of motion has a significant impact on the training outcomes. Therefore, this study aimed to examine differences in training volume assessed by a number of performed repetitions, time under tension, and load–displacement as well as peak barbell velocity between the cambered and standard barbell bench press training session. The participants performed 3 sets to muscular failure of bench press exercise with the cambered or standard barbell at 50% of one-repetition maximum (1RM). Eighteen healthy men volunteered for the study (age = 25 ± 2 years; body mass = 92.1 ± 9.9 kg; experience in resistance training 7.3 ± 2.1 years; standard and cambered barbell bench press 1RM > 120% body mass). The t-test indicated a significantly higher mean range of motion for the cambered barbell in comparison to the standard (p < 0.0001; ES =  −2.24). Moreover, there was a significantly greater number of performed repetitions during the standard barbell bench press than cambered barbell (p < 0.0001) in a whole training session, while no difference was found in total time under tension (p = 0.22) and total load–displacement (p = 0.913). The two-way repeated-measures ANOVA indicated a significant barbell × set interaction effect for peak velocity (p = 0.01) and a number of repetitions (p = 0.015). The post-hoc analysis showed a significantly higher number of repetitions for standard than cambered barbell bench press in set 1 (p < 0.0001), set 3 (p < 0.0001) but not in set 2 (p = 0.066). Moreover, there was a significantly higher peak velocity during the cambered than standard barbell bench press in set 1 (p < 0.0001), and set 2 (p = 0.049), but not in set 3 (p = 0.063). No significant differences between corresponding sets of the standard and cambered barbell bench press in time under tension and load–displacement were found. However, concentric time under tension was significantly higher during cambered barbell bench press in all sets (p < 0.05) when compared to the standard barbell bench press, while eccentric time under tension was significantly lower during the cambered than standard barbell bench presses only in the set 3 (p = 0.001). In summary, this study briefly showed that measuring training volume by the number of performed repetitions is not reliable when different exercise range of motion is used.

BackgroundAbiraterone acetate (ABI) therapy improves overall survival in metastatic prostate cancer (PC) patients; however, this effect may be diminished by concurrent comorbidities. We aimed to evaluate the influence of pre-existing chronic diseases and concomitant medications on the course of ABI treatment among post-chemotherapy patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients (mCRPC).MethodsFrom the Polish National Health Fund database, we identified 93 post-chemotherapy, mCRPC patients, who were qualified for ABI treatment in our oncology center between 2014 and 2018. Survival curves and Cox proportional hazard models (univariate and multivariate) were used to determine the predictors for longer time to treatment failure (TTF) of ABI therapy.ResultsMedian TTF was 9,8 months (IQR: 0,6–56,5) Factors associated with longer TTF were: well controlled hypertension (HR, 0.59; 95% CI. 0.38–0.90; p = 0.02), stable coronary artery disease (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.33–0.95; p=0.03), the use of angiotensin system inhibitor (ASi) (HR, 0.61; 95% CI 0.4–0.94; p = 0,02). Patients who were receiving ASi had median TTF of 12.2 months versus 5.8 months in men who did not receive ASi before ABI initiation. At the start of ABI therapy, the aforementioned groups did not differ in terms of well-known prognostic factors: Gleason score, PSA level, or the number of patients with visceral metastases. In a multivariate analysis, the use of ASi remained statistically significant, even after adjustment for well-known oncological factors (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.34–0.98; p = 0.04).ConclusionsThe use of ASi may enhance and prolong ABI therapy in post-docetaxel mCRPC patients and may potentially be considered a new, non-oncological, predictive factor for longer TTF. This association requires a prospective validation.