Resistance Training in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review of Exercise Programs

Montaño-Rojas, Leidy Sofía; Romero-Pérez, Ena Monserrat; Medina-Pérez, Carlos; Reguera-García, María Mercedes; Paz, José Antonio de

doi:10.3390/ijerph17186511

Cited by 40 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, our results showed that exercise interventions at least maintain fitness levels for BCP and improve it for BCS, with promising substantial responses from RT interventions. These results are in alignment with the review from Montaño-Rojas et al and the review from Strasser et al in which ST improvements were found in either BCS and BCP [64,65].…”

Section: Strengthsupporting

confidence: 91%

Impact of exercise interventions on physical fitness in breast cancer patients and survivors: a systematic review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This systematic review aims to identify the effects of exercise interventions in patients with breast cancer (BCP) and survivors (BCS) on selected variables of physical fitness. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted using Medline and Scopus. Randomized controlled trials with isolated exercise interventions in BCP and BCS women (< 5 years from therapy completion) were included. The risk of bias (RoB) assessment was conducted using the Cochrane RoB-2-tool. Variables regarding cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), strength (ST), fatigue (F) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were discussed. Results Of the 336 studies initially identified, 22 met all the inclusion criteria and were deemed eligible. RoB assessment indicated that the studies had predominantly “some concerns” or had “low RoB”, with only 3 studies presenting a “high RoB”. The mean duration and frequency of exercise interventions were 19 weeks and 3 sessions/week, performed at moderate intensity (65% VO2max and 66% 1RM, for aerobic and resistance-training interventions, respectively). Conclusions Exercise interventions seem to be a valuable strategy in BCP to avoid the decline of CRF, ST, F and HRQoL. Conversely, improved physical function among BCS is observed for the same variables. Resistance training and combined interventions seem to provide the most encouraging variations of the selected outcomes. PROSPERO registration ID CRD42021237917.

show abstract

Section: Strengthsupporting

confidence: 91%

Impact of exercise interventions on physical fitness in breast cancer patients and survivors: a systematic review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Resistance training programs performed on strengthtraining machines have been investigated with regards to their role in BCRL. In addition to determining an improvement in QoL, psychological, cognitive, and social condition, muscle strength, fatigue, pain, and aerobic capacity, resistance training are considered safe as it do not affect the development or worsening of LYE (33,42,(46)(47)(48), if there is control and progression in training (49), as reported by previous literature (14). Hence, resistance exercise should be considered an additional treatment in cancer patient rehabilitation (48).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Integrated Treatment of Breast Cancer-related Lymphedema: A Descriptive Review of the State of the Art

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aim: Upper limb breast cancerrelated lymphedema (BCRL) is a chronic and severe condition affecting a significant percentage of breast cancer survivors. Even though its physiopathology is well-known, there is no worldwide consensus on BCRL evaluation and a goldstandard treatment. This narrative review aims at providing a brief descriptive overview with regard to BCRL treatment modalities. Materials and Methods: We conducted a literature search within the PubMed database, and 33 articles out of 56 were selected, including reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses aiming find the most updated evidence regarding BCRL treatment modalities. Results: Physical exercise (aerobic exercise, resistance exercise, aquatic therapy), bandages, and intermittent pneumatic compression were shown to be most effective in BCRL patients, in terms of swelling reduction in the acute-intensive phase. Furthermore, physical exercise was beneficial also as a maintenance tool. Manual lymphatic drainage demonstrated efficacy in preventing secondary lymphedema if applied immediately after breast cancer surgery or in early phases of BCRL or as a maintenance tool. Complementary procedures such as acupuncture, reflexology, yoga and photo-biomodulation therapy did not show conclusive results in BCRL treatment. Surgery was shown effective in managing symptoms (liposuction), preventing (lymphaticovenular anastomosis) and treating BCRL (vascularized lymph node transfer). Conclusion: BCRL is still a challenging condition either for breast cancer survivors and clinicians, deeply impacting patient functioning and quality of life. Due to the lack of globally accepted criteria in evaluating BCRL, to date a gold standard treatment for this widespread issue is still needed.Improved survival rates in breast cancer patients contribute to an increased number of survivors complaining of upper limb Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema (BCRL), which is a secondary lymphedema after surgery and radiation therapy (1). BCRL is a common complication occurring after lymph node dissection for breast or upper limb tumors (e.g., melanoma), and it is generally caused by an excessive accumulation of protein-rich fluid (lymph) in tissue extracellular spaces that causes transient or persistent soft tissue swelling (2). Up to 30% (3-5) of breast cancer survivors, may suffer from BCRL and its physical and psychological consequences such as: pain, pitting edema, upper limb heaviness and discomfort, decreased range of motion of the affected joints, recurrent skin infections and ulcers, elephantiasis, cutaneous angiosarcoma, depression, anxiety, body image-related disorder. Quality of life (QoL) is dramatically worsened by BCRL.

show abstract

“…Consequently, a variety of research groups has performed projects to enhance the application range and quality of RT regimens as well as to test different RT intensity protocols in CS. With regard to the application range, the eld of RT research in CS has moved from the "classical" breast CS treated with curative intent [22] to studies that were enrolling cachectic head and neck [23], pancreatic [24], advanced renal cell [25] or lung CS [26] as well as CS with unstable bone metastasis [27]. Other studies have successfully tested RT regimens not following the "classical" progressive hypertrophy RT approach (2-3 sets with 12 reps), but a maximal strength training protocol with 4x4 repetitions of dynamic leg press at approximately 90% of the 1-RM twice a week for 12 weeks in early stage breast CS [28].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are percentages of the one-repetition maximum (1-RM) suitable for prescribing resistance exercise in cancer survivors? - Comparability and prediction accuracy of frequently used 1-RM testing procedures

Schneider

Schlüter

Rosenberger

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To prescribe resistance training (RT) using percentages of (%) maximal strength (Smax), it is prerequisite that (I) methods for testing Smax are valid and (II) the relationship between %Smax and the corresponding number of repetitions (NOR) is known. This has never been investigated in cancer survivors (CS) and was the purpose of the present study. Methods Twenty breast (58 ± 10y) and 20 prostate CS (68 ± 6y), 3.6 ± 2.4 months after primary therapy, completed one one-repetition maximum (1-RM) test, one hypothetical 1-RM (h1-RM) test and three RT sessions (three sets at six different strength machines (SM)). H1-RM was calculated using two commonly used equations (after Brzycki and Epley), resulting in three Smax values for each SM, which were then compared to each other (1-RM as a reference). Each RT session was performed at a different intensity (92%, 69% and 47% of 1-RM/h1-RM). CS performed repetitions to fatigue and the resulting NOR were compared to the predicted NOR. Results Smax values differed between 1-RM and h1-RM values for each SM and between h1-RM values for some SM. Differences between performed and predicted NOR occurred among all intensities and methods. Conclusion Different strength tests yield different results for Smax and a certain %1-RM/h1-RM does not necessarily correspond to a specific NOR in all individuals, which questions the use of (I) h1-RM tests for determining Smax and (II) prescribing RT intensities based on %1-RM/h1-RM which is still the most common method used for RT intensity prescription in healthy individuals and patient populations, including CS.

show abstract

Resistance Training in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review of Exercise Programs

Cited by 40 publications

References 58 publications

Impact of exercise interventions on physical fitness in breast cancer patients and survivors: a systematic review

Impact of exercise interventions on physical fitness in breast cancer patients and survivors: a systematic review

Integrated Treatment of Breast Cancer-related Lymphedema: A Descriptive Review of the State of the Art

Are percentages of the one-repetition maximum (1-RM) suitable for prescribing resistance exercise in cancer survivors? - Comparability and prediction accuracy of frequently used 1-RM testing procedures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About