Moderators of exercise effects on cancer-related fatigue: a meta-analysis of individual patient data

• Main Authors: JK Van Vulpen, MG Sweegers, PHM Peeters, KS Courneya, RU Newton, NK Aaronson, PB Jacobsen, DA Galvaõ, MJ Chinapaw, K Steindorf, ML Irwin, MM Stuiver, S Hayes, KA Griffith, I Mesters, H Knoop, MM Goedendorp, N Mutrie, Amanda Daley, A McConnachie, M Bohus, L Thorsen, KH Schulz, CE Short, EL James, RC Plotnikoff, ME Schmidt, CM Ulrich, M Van Beurden, HS Oldenburg, GS Sonke, WH Van Harten, KH Schmitz, KM Winters-Stone, MJ Velthuis, DR Taaffe, W Van Mechelen, MJ Kersten, F Nollet, J Wenzel, J Wiskemann, IM Verdonck-De Leeuw, J Brug, AM May, LM Buffart
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Cancer; Exercise; Fatigue; Individual patient data meta-analysis

Purpose: Fatigue is a common and potentially disabling symptom in patients with cancer. It can often be effectively reduced by exercise. Yet, effects of exercise interventions might differ across subgroups. We conducted a meta-analysis using individual patient data of randomized controlled trials (RCT) to investigate moderators of exercise intervention effects on cancer-related fatigue. Methods: We used individual patient data from 31 exercise RCT worldwide, representing 4366 patients, of whom 3846 had complete fatigue data. We performed a one-step individual patient data meta-analysis, using linear mixed-effect models to analyze the effects of exercise interventions on fatigue (z score) and to identify demographic, clinical, intervention- A nd exercise-related moderators. Models were adjusted for baseline fatigue and included a random intercept on study level to account for clustering of patients within studies. We identified potential moderators by testing their interaction with group allocation, using a likelihood ratio test. Results: Exercise interventions had statistically significant beneficial effects on fatigue (β =-0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI],-0.22 to-0.12). There was no evidence of moderation by demographic or clinical characteristics. Supervised exercise interventions had significantly larger effects on fatigue than unsupervised exercise interventions (βdifference =-0.18; 95% CI-0.28 to-0.08). Supervised interventions with a duration ≤12 wk showed larger effects on fatigue (β =-0.29; 95% CI,-0.39 to-0.20) than supervised interventions with a longer duration. Conclusions: In this individual patient data meta-analysis, we found statistically significant beneficial effects of exercise interventions on fatigue, irrespective of demographic and clinical characteristics. These findings support a role for exercise, preferably supervised exercise interventions, in clinical practice. Reasons for differential effects in duration require further exploration.