Lisa Loughney

Background: Prehabilitation is increasingly being used in patients undergoing multimodality treatment for oesophagogastric cancer (OGC). Most studies to date have been small, single-centre trials. This collaborative study sought to assess the overall impact of prehabilitation on patient outcomes following OGC surgery. Methods: Data came from four prospective prehabilitation trials conducted in the UK or Ireland in patients undergoing multimodality treatment for OGC. The studies included three randomised and one non-randomised clinical trial, each comparing a prehabilitation intervention group to controls. The prehabilitation interventions included aerobic training delivered by exercise physiologists alongside dietetic input throughout the treatment pathway. The primary outcome was survival (all-cause and disease-specific mortality). Secondary outcomes were differences in complications, cardio-respiratory fitness (changes in VO_{2 peak} and anaerobic threshold (AT)), chemotherapy completion rates, hospital length of stay, changes in body mass index, tumour regression and complication rates of anastomotic leak and pneumonia. Cox and logistic regression analysis provided hazard ratios (HR) and odds ratios (OR), respectively, with 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for confounders. Results: Among 165 patients included, 88 patients were in the prehabilitation group and 77 patients were in the control group. All-cause and disease-specific mortality were not improved by prehabilitation (HR 0.67 95% CI 0.21–2.12 and HR 0.82 95% CI 0.42–1.57, respectively). The prehabilitation group experienced fewer major complications (20% vs. 36%, p = 0.034; adjusted OR of 0.54; 95%CI 0.26–1.13). There was a mitigated decline in VO_2 peak following neo-adjuvant therapy (delta prehabilitation −1.07 mL/kg/min vs. control −2.74 mL/kg/min; p = 0.035) and chemotherapy completion rates were significantly higher following prehabilitation (90% vs. 73%; p = 0.016). Hospital length of stay (10 vs. 12 days, p = 0.402) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy response (Mandard 1–3 41% vs. 35%; p = 0.494) favoured prehabilitation, albeit not statistically significantly. Conclusion: Despite some limitations in terms of heterogeneity of study methodology, this study suggests a number of meaningful clinical benefits from prehabilitation before surgery for OGC patients. Current initiatives to agree on national standards for delivering prehabilitation and the results of ongoing trials will help to further refine this important intervention and expand the evidence base to support the widespread adoption and implementation of prehabilitation programs.

Introduction: Although the benefits of post-operative rehabilitation in cancer surgery are well established, the role of prehabilitation is less defined. Oesophagogastric cancers present a unique opportunity to study the impact of prehabilitation during the neoadjuvant window, whether with chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy (NCT) in patients who are frequently nutritionally depleted. This trial examines the impact of a community-based exercise programme on patient fitness during and after the neoadjuvant window. Methods: A pragmatic, randomized controlled multicentre trial was undertaken in three centres. Inclusion criteria were patients aged at least 18 years planned for NCT and esophagectomy or gastrectomy. Participants were randomized 1:1 to an exercise prehabilitation group (EX) or to usual care (UC). The primary endpoint was cardiorespiratory fitness between baseline and pre-surgery time point using the 6-minute walk test (MVT). Secondary endpoints included a hand dynamometer, 10-s sit-to-stand, activity behaviour, body mass index, semi-structured interviews, questionnaires assessing the quality of life, surgical fear, general self-efficacy and mastery. Results: Between March 2019 and December 2020, 71 participants were recruited: EX (n=36) or UC (n=35). From baseline to pre-surgery, the difference-in-difference (DID) for EX showed a significant improvement in 6MWT of 50.7 m (P=0.05) compared to UC [mean (SD): 522.1 m (+/−104.3) to 582.1 m (+/−108) vs. 497.5 m (+/−106.3) to 506.0 m (+/−140.4). There was no statistically significant DID for secondary outcome measures. Conclusions: This community exercise prehabilitation programme significantly improves physical fitness for surgery, is feasible and provides a standardized framework for the prescription of exercise in oesophagogastric cancer patients undergoing NCT.

Neoadjuvant cancer treatment (NCT) reduces both physical fitness and physical activity (PA) levels, which can increase the risk of adverse outcomes in cancer patients. This study aims to determine the effect of exercise prehabilitation on PA and sedentary behavior (SB) in patients undergoing NCT and surgery for esophagogastric malignancies. This study is a randomized pragmatic controlled multi-center trial conducted across three Irish hospitals. Participants were aged ≥18 years scheduled for esophagectomy or gastrectomy and were planned for NCT and surgery. Participants were randomized to an exercise prehabilitation group (EX) that commenced following cancer diagnosis, continued to the point of surgery, and resumed following recovery from surgery for 6 weeks or to usual care (UC) who received routine treatment. The primary outcome measures were PA and SB. Between March 2019 and December 2020, 71 participants were recruited: EX (n = 36) or UC (n = 35). No significant differences were found between the EX group and UC group on levels of PA or SBs across all measured timepoints. Significant decreases in moderate–vigorous physical activity levels (MVPAs) were found between baseline and post-surgery (P = 0.028), pre-surgery and post-surgery (P = 0.001) and pre-surgery and 6-week follow-up (P = 0.022) for all participants. Step count also significantly decreased between pre-surgery and post-surgery (P < 0.001). Baseline aerobic fitness was positively associated to PA levels and negatively associated with SB. Esophagogastric cancer patients have lower than recommended levels of PA at the time of diagnosis and this decreased further following completion of NCT. An optional home- or group-based exercise intervention was not effective in improving PA levels or behaviors across the cancer treatment journey.

Objective: Cancer remains one of the most enduring health crises of the modern world. Prehabilitation is a relatively new intervention aimed at preparing individuals for the stresses associated with treatment from diagnosis. Prehabilitation can include exercise, psychological and nutrition‐based interventions. The present systematic review aimed to assess the efficacy of prehabilitation on affective and functional outcomes for young to midlife adult cancer patients (18–55 years). Outcomes of interest included prehabilitation programme composition, duration, mode of delivery and measures used to determine impact on affective and functional outcomes.Methods: The following databases were searched with controlled and free text vocabulary; Psychological Information database (PsychINFO), Culmunated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE) and Public MEDLINE (PubMed). Abstract and full‐text screening was conducted with a secondary reviewer and final texts were subject to risk of bias analysis.Results: Thirteen texts were included at full‐text. These included data of 797 prehabilitation participants (mean age 53 years) and a large representation of female participants (71% average). Evidence was found for the efficacy of psychological prehabilitation for anxiety reduction. Prehabilitation did not significantly affect health related quality of life. Findings moderately supported the therapeutic validity of exercise prehabilitation for functional outcomes, both in terms of clinical and experimental improvement with respect to the quality of evidence. Variation between all prehabilitation types was observed. There was insufficient evidence to support the efficacy of psychological prehabilitation on stress, distress or depression.Conclusion: Implications for future research are highlighted and then discussed with respect to this young to midlife age group.

Background: The EMPOWER trial aimed to assess the effects of a 9-week exercise prehabilitation programme on physical fitness compared with a usual care control group. Secondary aims were to investigate the effect of (1) the exercise prehabilitation programme on psychological health; and (2) neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) on physical fitness and psychological health. Methods: Between October 2013 and December 2016, adults with locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing standardised NCRT and surgery were recruited to a multi-centre trial. Patients underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and completed HRQoL questionnaires (EORTC-QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L) pre-NCRT and post-NCRT (week 0/baseline). At week 0, patients were randomised to exercise prehabilitation or usual care (no intervention). CPET and HRQoL questionnaires were assessed at week 0, 3, 6 and 9, whilst semi-structured interviews were assessed at week 0 and week 9. Changes in oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold (VO ₂ at AT (ml kg ⁻¹ min ⁻¹ )) between groups were compared using linear mixed modelling. Results: Thirty-eight patients were recruited, mean age 64 (10.4) years. Of the 38 patients, 33 were randomised: 16 to usual care and 17 to exercise prehabilitation (26 males and 7 females). Exercise prehabilitation significantly improved VO ₂ at AT at week 9 compared to the usual care. The change from baseline to week 9, when adjusted for baseline, between the randomised groups was + 2.9 ml kg ⁻¹ min ⁻¹ ; (95% CI 0.8 to 5.1), p = 0.011. Conclusion: A 9-week exercise prehabilitation programme significantly improved fitness following NCRT. These findings have informed the WesFit trial (NCT03509428) which is investigating the effects of community-based multimodal prehabilitation before cancer surgery. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01914068 . Registered 1 August 2013.

Background: Neoadjuvant cancer treatment is associated with improved survival following major oesophagogastric cancer surgery. The impact of neoadjuvant chemo/chemoradiotherapy on physical fitness and operative outcomes is however unclear. This study aims to investigate the impact of neoadjuvant chemo/chemoradiotherapy on fitness and post-operative mortality. Methods: Patients with oesophagogastric cancer scheduled for chemo/chemoradiotherapy and surgery were recruited to a prospective, blinded, multi-centre, observational cohort study. Primary outcomes were changes in fitness with chemo/chemoradiotherapy, measured using cardiopulmonary exercise testing and its association with mortality one-year after surgery. Patients were followed up for re-admission at 30-days, in-hospital morbidity and quality of life (exploratory outcomes). Results: In total, 384 patients were screened, 217 met the inclusion criteria, 160 consented and 159 were included (72% male, mean age 65 years). A total of 132 patients (83%) underwent chemo/chemoradiotherapy, 109 (71%) underwent chemo/chemoradiotherapy and two exercise tests, 100 (63%) completed surgery and follow-up. A significant decline in oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold and oxygen uptake peak was observed following chemo/chemoradiotherapy: -1.25ml.kg-1.min-1 (-1.80 to -0.69) and -3.02ml.kg-1.min-1 (-3.85 to -2.20); p<0.0001). Baseline chemo/chemoradiotherapy anaerobic threshold and peak were associated with one-year mortality (HR=0.72, 95%CI 0.59 to 0.88; p=0.001 and HR=0.85, 0.76 to 0.95; p=0.005). The change in physical fitness was not associated with one-year mortality. Conclusion: Chemo/chemoradiotherapy prior to oesophagogastric cancer surgery reduced physical fitness. Lower baseline fitness was associated with reduced overall survival at one-year. Careful consideration of fitness prior to chemo/chemoradiotherapy and surgery is urgently needed.

Background: Men with a newly diagnosed prostate cancer are often treated by surgery. The time window between cancer diagnosis and surgery causes high levels of uncertainty and stress, which negatively impact quality of life (QoL). We previously reported a larger intervention pilot study which demonstrated that participation in a community-based pre-operative exercise programme significantly improved physical fitness and health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer prior to surgery. The aim of the current pilot study was to get an insight into men’s perceptions of wellbeing and QoL following completion of the pre-operative exercise programme.Methods: From November 2017 to June 2018, men scheduled for prostate cancer surgery were recruited and took part in a prescribed community-based pre-operative exercise programme in the time available between referral and surgery. Following completion of the pre-operative exercise programme (within 1 week before surgery), participants took part in one semi-structured interview which explored four broad QoL domains: physical, psychological, social, and spiritual wellbeing. Data were analysed using thematic analysis (a bottom up/inductive analysis).Results: Eleven men were recruited: mean standard deviation (SD) age was 60 ± 7 years. Data supported four main themes. Participation in the community-based pre-operative exercise training programme (over a mean (SD) of 4 ± 2 weeks) provided participants with: 1) a teachable moment; 2) a journey of preparation; 3) a sense of optimism; and 4) social connectedness prior to surgery.Conclusion: This study provides an insight into how the exercise programme impacted wellbeing and QoL in men preparing for prostate cancer surgery. These findings highlight the important role that exercise prehabilitation plays for men preparing for prostate cancer surgery. Such exercise programmes can be easily implemented into standard cancer pathways by establishing relationships between hospital teams and community exercise programmes.

Background: Treatment for peritoneal malignancy (PM) can include cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and heated intrapertioneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and is associated with morbidity and mortality. Physical, psychological and nutritional outcomes are important pre-operatively. The aim of this pilot study was to investigate these outcomes in patients with PM before and after CRS-HIPEC. Methods: Between June 2018 and November 2019, participants were recruited to a single-centre study. Primary outcome was cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) variables oxygen uptake (VO₂) at anaerobic threshold (AT) and at peak. Secondary outcome measures were upper and lower body strength, health related quality of life (HRQoL) and the surgical fear questionnaire. Exploratory outcomes included body mass index, nutrient intake and post-operative outcome. All participants were asked to undertake assessments pre CRS-HIPEC and 12 weeks following the procedure. Results: Thirty-nine patients were screened, 38 were eligible and 16 were recruited. Ten female and 6 male, median (IQR) age 53 (42–63) years. Of the 16 patients recruited, 14 proceeded with CRS-HIPEC and 10 competed the follow up assessment at week 12. Pre-operative VO₂ at AT and peak was 16.8 (13.7–18) ml.kg^-1.min^-1 and 22.2 (19.3–25.3) ml.kg^-1.min^-1, upper body strength was 25.9 (20.3–41.5) kg, lower body strength was 14 (10.4–20.3) sec, HRQoL (overall health status) was 72.5 (46.3–80) % whilst overall surgical fear was 39 (30.5–51). The VO₂ at AT decreased significantly (p = 0.05) and HRQoL improved (p = 0.04) between pre and post- CRS-HIPEC. There were no significant differences for any of the other outcome measures. Conclusion: This pilot study showed a significant decrease in VO₂ at AT and an improvement in overall HRQoL at the 12 week follow up. The findings will inform a larger study design to investigate a prehabilitation and rehabilitation cancer survivorship programme.

BackgroundThe EMPOWER trial aimed to assess the effects of a 9-week exercise prehabilitation programme on physical fitness compared with a usual care control group. Secondary aims were to investigate the effect of 1) the exercise prehabilitation programme on psychological health; and 2) neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) on physical fitness and psychological health.MethodsBetween October 2013 and December 2016, adults with locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing standardised NCRT and surgery were recruited to a multi-centre trial. Patients underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and HRQoL questionnaires (EORTC-QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L) pre-NCRT and post-NCRT (week 0/baseline). At week 0, patients were randomised to exercise prehabilitation or usual care (no intervention). CPET and HRQoL questionnaires were assessed at week 0, 3, 6 and 9, whilst semi structured interviews were assessed at week 0 and week 9. Changes in oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold (VO₂ at AT (ml.kg^− 1.min^− 1)) between groups was compared using linear mixed modelling.ResultsThirty-eight patients were recruited, mean age 64 (10.4) years. Of the 38 patients, 33 were randomised: 16 to usual care and 17 to exercise prehabilitation (26 male and seven female). Exercise prehabilitation significantly improved VO₂ at AT compared to the usual care. The change from baseline to week 9, when adjusted for baseline, between the randomised groups was + 2.9 ml.kg^− 1.min^− 1; 95% CI (0.8 to 5.1); p = 0.011.ConclusionA 9-week exercise prehabilitation programme significantly rescued fitness following NCRT. These findings have informed the WesFit trial (NCT03509428) which is investigating the effects of community-based multimodal prehabilitation before cancer surgery.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01914068. Registered 1 August 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01914068.