ObjectivesTo investigate cartilage tissue turnover in response to a supervised 12-week exercise-related joint loading training program followed by a 6-month period of unsupervised training in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). To study the difference in cartilage tissue turnover between high- and low-resistance training.MethodPatients with knee OA were randomized into either high-intensity or low-intensity resistance supervised training (two sessions per week) for 3 months and unsupervised training for 6 months. Blood samples were collected before and after the supervised training period and after the follow-up period. Biomarkers huARGS, C2M, and PRO-C2, quantifying cartilage tissue turnover, were measured by ELISA. Changes in biomarker levels over time within and between groups were analyzed using linear mixed models with baseline values as covariates.ResultshuARGS and C2M levels increased after training and at follow-up in both low- and high-intensity exercise groups. No changes were found in PRO-C2. The huARGS level in the high-intensity resistance training group increased significantly compared to the low-intensity resistance training group after resistance training (p = 0.029) and at follow-up (p = 0.003).ConclusionCartilage tissue turnover and cartilage degradation appear to increase in response to a 3-month exercise-related joint loading training program and at 6-month follow-up, with no evident difference in type II collagen formation. Aggrecan remodeling increased more with high-intensity resistance training than with low-intensity exercise.These exploratory biomarker results, indicating more cartilage degeneration in the high-intensity group, in combination with no clinical outcome differences of the VIDEX study, may argue against high-intensity training.
The background and purpose of this paper is to investigate adherence, exercise performance levels and associated factors in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients participating in a guided home-based prophylactic exercise program during and after treatment [swallowing sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy (SW-IMRT)]. Fifty patients were included in the study. Adherence was defined as the percentage of patients who kept up exercising; exercise performance level was categorized as low: ≤1, moderate: 1–2, and high: ≥2 time(s) per day, on average. Associations between 6- and 12-week exercise performance levels and age, gender, tumour site and stage, treatment, intervention format (online or booklet), number of coaching sessions, and baseline HNC symptoms (EORTC-QLQ-H&N35) were investigated. Adherence rate at 6 weeks was 70% and decreased to 38% at 12 weeks. In addition, exercise performance levels decreased over time (during 6 weeks: 34% moderate and 26% high; during 12 weeks: 28% moderate and 18% high). The addition of chemotherapy to SW-IMRT [(C)SW-IMRT] significantly deteriorated exercise performance level. Adherence to a guided home-based prophylactic exercise program was high during (C)SW-IMRT, but dropped afterwards. Exercise performance level was negatively affected by chemotherapy in combination with SW-IMRT.
Introduction: Patients with cancer receiving radio- or chemotherapy undergo many immunological stressors. Chronic regular exercise has been shown to positively influence the immune system in several populations, while exercise overload may have negative effects. Exercise is currently recommended for all patients with cancer. However, knowledge regarding the effects of exercise on immune markers in patients undergoing chemo- or radiotherapy is limited. The aim of this study is to systematically review the effects of moderate- and high-intensity exercise interventions in patients with cancer during chemotherapy or radiotherapy on immune markers. Methods: For this review, a search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE, until March 2023. Methodological quality was assessed with the PEDro tool and best-evidence syntheses were performed both per immune marker and for the inflammatory profile. Results: Methodological quality of the 15 included articles was rated fair to good. The majority of markers were unaltered, but observed effects included a suppressive effect of exercise during radiotherapy on some proinflammatory markers, a preserving effect of exercise during chemotherapy on NK cell degranulation and cytotoxicity, a protective effect on the decrease in thrombocytes during chemotherapy, and a positive effect of exercise during chemotherapy on IgA. Conclusion: Although exercise only influenced a few markers, the results are promising. Exercise did not negatively influence immune markers, and some were positively affected since suppressed inflammation might have positive clinical implications. For future research, consensus is needed regarding a set of markers that are most responsive to exercise. Next, differential effects of training types and intensities on these markers should be further investigated, as well as their clinical implications.
