Cardiovascular Toxicities Secondary to Biotherapy and Molecular Targeted Therapies in Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials

A broad spectrum of novel targeted therapies with prime antitumor activity and/or ample control of hormonal symptoms together with an overall acceptable safety profile have emerged for patients with metastatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs). In this systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis, the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched to assess and compare the safety profile of NEN treatments with special focus on the cardiovascular adverse effects of biotherapy and molecular targeted therapies (MTTs). Quality/risk of bias were assessed using GRADE criteria. Placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in patients with metastatic NENs, including medullary thyroid cancer (MTC) were included. A total of 3695 articles and 122 clinical trials registered in clinicaltrials.gov were screened. We included sixteen relevant RCTs comprising 3408 unique patients assigned to different treatments compared with placebo. All the included studies had a low risk of bias. We identified four drug therapies for NENs with eligible placebo-controlled RCTs: somatostatin analogs (SSAs), tryptophan hydroxylase (TPH) inhibitors, mTOR inhibitors and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). Grade 3 and 4 adverse effects (AE) were more often encountered in patients treated with mTOR inhibitors and TKI (odds ratio [OR]: 2.42, 95% CI: 1.87–3.12 and OR: 3.41, 95% CI: 1.46–7.96, respectively) as compared to SSAs (OR:0.77, 95% CI: 0.47–1.27) and TPH inhibitors (OR:0.77, 95% CI: 0.35–1.69). MTOR inhibitors had the highest risk for serious cardiac AE (OR:3.28, 95% CI: 1.66–6.48) followed by TKIs (OR:1.51, 95% CI: 0.59–3.83). Serious vascular AE were more often encountered in NEN patients treated with mTOR inhibitors (OR: 1.72, 95% CI: 0.64–4.64) and TKIs (OR:1.64, 95% CI: 0.35–7.78). Finally, patients on TKIs were at higher risk for new-onset or exacerbation of pre-existing hypertension (OR:3.31, 95% CI: 1.87–5.86). In conclusion, SSAs and TPH inhibitors appear to be safer as compared to mTOR inhibitors and TKIs with regards to their overall toxicity profile, and cardiovascular toxicities in particular. Special consideration should be given to a patient-tailored approach with anticipated toxicities of targeted NEN treatments together with assessment of cardiovascular comorbidities, assisting clinicians in treatment selection and early recognition/management of cardiovascular toxicities. This approach could improve patient compliance and preserve cardiovascular health and overall quality of life.

Download Full-text

Calcium supplementation for improving bone density in lactating women: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition ◽

10.1093/ajcn/nqaa103 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 112 (1) ◽

pp. 48-56

Author(s):

Guoqi Cai ◽

Jing Tian ◽

Tania Winzenberg ◽

Feitong Wu

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Calcium Intake ◽

Calcium Supplementation ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Lactating Women ◽

Randomized Controlled

ABSTRACT Background Clinical trials evaluating the effect of calcium supplementation on bone loss in lactating women have been small, with inconsistent results. Objectives We aimed to determine the effect of calcium supplementation on bone mineral density (BMD) in lactating women. Methods An electronic search of databases was conducted from inception to January 2020. Two authors screened studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of eligible studies. Percentage change in BMD was pooled using random-effects models and reported as weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% CIs. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results Five randomized controlled trials including 567 lactating women were included. All had a high risk of bias. Mean baseline calcium intake ranged from 562 to 1333 mg/d. Compared with control groups (placebo/no intervention), calcium supplementation (600/1000 mg/d) had no significant effect on BMD at the lumbar spine (WMD: 0.74%; 95% CI: −0.10%, 1.59%; I2 = 47%; 95% CI: 0%, 81%; n = 527 from 5 trials) or the forearm (WMD: 0.53%; 95% CI: −0.35%, 1.42%; I2 = 55%; 95% CI: 0%, 85%; n = 415 from 4 trials). BMD at other sites was assessed in single trials: calcium supplementation had a small to moderate effect on total-hip BMD (WMD: 3.3%; 95% CI: 1.5%, 5.1%) but no effect on total body or femoral neck BMD. Conclusions Overall, the meta-analysis indicates that calcium supplementation does not provide clinically important benefits for BMD in lactating women. However, there was adequate dietary intake before supplementation in some studies, and others did not measure baseline calcium intake. Advising lactating women to meet the current recommended calcium intakes (with supplementation if dietary intake is low) is warranted unless new high-certainty evidence to the contrary from robust clinical trials becomes available. More research needs to be done in larger samples of women from diverse ethnic and racial groups. This systematic review was registered at www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero as CRD42015022092.

Download Full-text

Short-Term Effectiveness and Safety of Biologics and Small Molecule Drugs for Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Life ◽

10.3390/life11090927 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (9) ◽

pp. 927

Author(s):

José-Juan Pereyra-Rodriguez ◽

Sara Alcantara-Luna ◽

Javier Domínguez-Cruz ◽

Manuel Galán-Gutiérrez ◽

Ricardo Ruiz-Villaverde ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Atopic Dermatitis ◽

Adverse Effects ◽

Small Molecules ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Severe Atopic Dermatitis ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Number Of Patients

Background: Some Network Meta-analysis (NMA) has been published regarding atopic dermatitis (AD). These studies have considered drugs under investigation both in monotheraphy or in combination with topical corticosteroids, as well as systemic immunosuppressant therapies. The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of biological agents and small molecules in AD. Methods: A systematic review and NMA of biologics agents and small molecules in AD was performed. A literature search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for clinical trials and systematic reviews between January 2000 and 19 December 2020. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. It was limited to English language and adult human subjects. Two networks were evaluated: monotherapy and combination with TCS. The two primary outcomes were Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) 75 and EASI 90 change from baseline to week 12–16, depending on source study cut-off. The Cochrane’s Risk of Bias tool 2011 update was used to analyze the risk of bias, focused on the primary objectives. Results: 30 RCTs (included in 26 publications) were included in the systematic review. Finally, 23 RCTs were included in the quantitative analysis (14 RCTs including 3582 patients in monotherapy; and 9 RCTs including 3686 patients with TCS). In monotherapy, a higher percentage of patients achieving EASI-75 was obtained with Upadacitinib 30 mg [OR: 18.90 (13.94; 25.62)] followed by Abrocitinib 200 mg [OR = 11.26 (7.02; 18.05)] and Upadacitinib 15 mg [OR: 10.89 (8.13; 14.59)]. These results were also observed in studies where the use of topical corticosteroid (TCS) was allowed (OR Upadacitinib 30 mg = 9.43; OR Abrocitinib 200 mg = 6.12; OR Upadacitinib 15 mg = 5.20). Regarding IGA, the percentage of patients achieving IGA0/1 was higher with both doses of Upadacitinib 30 mg [OR: 19.13 (13.14; 27.85)] and 15 mg [OR = 10.95 (7.52; 15.94). In studies where the use of TCS were allowed, however, the dose of Abrocitinib 200 mg [OR = 6.10 (3.94; 9.44)] showed higher efficacy than Upadacitinib 15 mg [OR = 5.47 (3.57; 8.41)]. Regarding safety, the drugs with the highest probability of presenting adverse effects were the Janus kinases (JAK) inhibitors, Upadacitinib and Abrocitinib in monotherapy and Baricitinib in combination with TCS. Discussion: Some risks of bias have been found, which must be taken into account when interpreting the results. The funnel plot shows a possible publication bias that may underestimate the efficacy of drugs. Upadacitinib and Abrocitinib are the drugs with the highest efficacy, both in monotherapy and in association with TCS. However, they were also those associated with the highest risk of adverse effects, showing monoclonal antibodies better safety profile. Limitations: We have included molecules still in the development phase as well studies completed and presented at conferences and with data available in Trialsgov® but not published yet. Several molecules’ development had included a small number of patients from 12 to 17 years of age, without being able to differentiate the results from the adult population. Other: Founding: None. PROSPERO database registration number CRD42021225793.

Download Full-text

Minocycline for the treatment of mental health and neurological conditions: study protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035080 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (3) ◽

pp. e035080

Author(s):

Chiara C Bortolasci ◽

Wolfgang Marx ◽

Adam J Walker ◽

Kyoko Hasebe ◽

Bianca E Kavanagh ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Neurological Disorders ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Sufficient Evidence ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Controlled Clinical Trials ◽

Randomised Controlled

IntroductionDue to the anti-inflammatory, antioxidant and anti-apoptotic properties of minocycline, clinical trials have evaluated the potential of this drug to treat several psychiatric and neurological disorders, including major depressive disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, stroke and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. This protocol proposes a systematic review (and potential meta-analysis) that aims to identify and critically evaluate randomised controlled trials of minocycline for treating psychiatric and neurological disorders.Methods and analysisPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, PsycINFO and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) will be used to identify randomised controlled trials that used minocycline to treat psychiatric and neurological disorders. Double-blind, randomised, controlled, clinical trials of participants aged 18 years or older and written in English will be included in the review. Data will be extracted by two independent reviewers. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines will be followed and the Cochrane Collaboration’s ‘Risk of Bias’ tool will be used to assess the risk of bias in all studies included in the systematic review. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system will be used to access the overall quality of the level of evidence of the studies. If sufficient evidence is identified, a meta-analysis will be conducted using the standardised mean difference approach and reported with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity of evidence will be evaluated using the I2model.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review will evaluate only published data; therefore, ethical approval is not required. The systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant research conferences.Trial registration numberCRD42020153292.

Download Full-text

Cannabinoids for adult cancer-related pain: systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care ◽

10.1136/bmjspcare-2019-002032 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

pp. 14-24 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Elaine G Boland ◽

Michael I Bennett ◽

Victoria Allgar ◽

Jason W Boland

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Adverse Effects ◽

Cancer Pain ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Mean Difference ◽

Low Risk ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Randomised Controlled

ObjectivesThere is increased interest in cannabinoids for cancer pain management and legislative changes are in progress in many countries. This study aims to determine the beneficial and adverse effects of cannabis/cannabinoids compared with placebo/other active agents for the treatment of cancer-related pain in adults.MethodsSystematic review and meta-analysis to identify randomised controlled trials of cannabinoids compared with placebo/other active agents for the treatment of cancer-related pain in adults to determine the effect on pain intensity (primary outcome) and adverse effects, including dropouts. Searches included Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane and grey literature. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed.ResultsWe identified 2805 unique records, of which six randomised controlled trials were included in this systematic review (n=1460 participants). Five studies were included in the meta-analysis (1442 participants). All had a low risk of bias. There was no difference between cannabinoids and placebo for the difference in the change in average Numeric Rating Scale pain scores (mean difference −0.21 (−0.48 to 0.07, p=0.14)); this remained when only phase III studies were meta-analysed: mean difference −0.02 (−0.21 to 0.16, p=0.80). Cannabinoids had a higher risk of adverse events when compared with placebo, especially somnolence (OR 2.69 (1.54 to 4.71), p<0.001) and dizziness (OR 1.58 (0.99 to 2.51), p=0.05). No treatment-related deaths were reported. Dropouts and mortality rates were high.ConclusionsStudies with a low risk of bias showed that for adults with advanced cancer, the addition of cannabinoids to opioids did not reduce cancer pain.Trial registration numberCRD42018107662.

Download Full-text

The effect of almond intake on lipid profile: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Food & Function ◽

10.1039/d0fo02878a ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Omid Asbaghi ◽

Vihan Moodi ◽

Amir Hadi ◽

Elham Eslampour ◽

Mina Shirinbakhshmasoleh ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Lipid Profile ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Randomized Controlled

A number of clinical trials have examined the effect of almond intake on the lipid profile in recent years; however, the results remain equivocal.

Download Full-text

Adjuvant Transarterial Chemoembolization Following Curative-Intent Hepatectomy Versus Hepatectomy Alone for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Cancers ◽

10.3390/cancers13122984 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 13 (12) ◽

pp. 2984

Author(s):

Stepan M. Esagian ◽

Christos D. Kakos ◽

Emmanouil Giorgakis ◽

Lyle Burdine ◽

J. Camilo Barreto ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Transarterial Chemoembolization ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Curative Intent ◽

Randomized Controlled

The role of adjuvant transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for patients with resectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing hepatectomy is currently unclear. We performed a systematic review of the literature using the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Random-effects meta-analysis was carried out to compare the overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of patients with resectable HCC undergoing hepatectomy followed by adjuvant TACE vs. hepatectomy alone in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Meta-regression analyses were performed to explore the effect of hepatitis B viral status, microvascular invasion, type of resection (anatomic vs. parenchymal-sparing), and tumor size on the outcomes. Ten eligible RCTs, reporting on 1216 patients in total, were identified. The combination of hepatectomy and adjuvant TACE was associated with superior OS (hazard ratio (HR): 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.52 to 0.85; p < 0.001) and RFS (HR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.88; p < 0.001) compared to hepatectomy alone. There were significant concerns regarding the risk of bias in most of the included studies. Overall, adjuvant TACE may be associated with an oncologic benefit in select HCC patients. However, the applicability of these findings may be limited to Eastern Asian populations, due to the geographically restricted sample. High-quality multinational RCTs, as well as predictive tools to optimize patient selection, are necessary before adjuvant TACE can be routinely implemented into standard practice. PROSPERO Registration ID: CRD42021245758.

Download Full-text

Comparative efficacy and safety of interventions for treating head lice: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

BMJ Paediatrics Open ◽

10.1136/bmjpo-2021-001129 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 5 (1) ◽

pp. e001129

Author(s):

Bill Stevenson ◽

Wubshet Tesfaye ◽

Julia Christenson ◽

Cynthia Mathew ◽

Solomon Abrha ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Head Lice ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Meta Analyses

BackgroundHead lice infestation is a major public health problem around the globe. Its treatment is challenging due to product failures resulting from rapidly emerging resistance to existing treatments, incorrect treatment applications and misdiagnosis. Various head lice treatments with different mechanism of action have been developed and explored over the years, with limited report on systematic assessments of their efficacy and safety. This work aims to present a robust evidence summarising the interventions used in head lice.MethodThis is a systematic review and network meta-analysis which will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement for network meta-analyses. Selected databases, including PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be systematically searched for randomised controlled trials exploring head lice treatments. Searches will be limited to trials published in English from database inception till 2021. Grey literature will be identified through Open Grey, AHRQ, Grey Literature Report, Grey Matters, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry and International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number registry. Additional studies will be sought from reference lists of included studies. Study screening, selection, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality will be undertaken by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved via a third reviewer. The primary outcome measure is the relative risk of cure at 7 and 14 days postinitial treatment. Secondary outcome measures may include adverse drug events, ovicidal activity, treatment compliance and acceptability, and reinfestation. Information from direct and indirect evidence will be used to generate the effect sizes (relative risk) to compare the efficacy and safety of individual head lice treatments against a common comparator (placebo and/or permethrin). Risk of bias assessment will be undertaken by two independent reviewers using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations guideline for network meta-analysis. All quantitative analyses will be conducted using STATA V.16.DiscussionThe evidence generated from this systematic review and meta-analysis is intended for use in evidence-driven treatment of head lice infestations and will be instrumental in informing health professionals, public health practitioners and policy-makers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017073375.

Download Full-text

Effects of open-label placebos in clinical trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Scientific Reports ◽

10.1038/s41598-021-83148-6 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Melina von Wernsdorff ◽

Martin Loef ◽

Brunna Tuschen-Caffier ◽

Stefan Schmidt

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Medical Condition ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Open Label ◽

Cancer Related Fatigue ◽

Promising Treatment ◽

Irritable Bowel

AbstractOpen-label placebos (OLPs) are placebos without deception in the sense that patients know that they are receiving a placebo. The objective of our study is to systematically review and analyze the effect of OLPs in comparison to no treatment in clinical trials. A systematic literature search was carried out in February 2020. Randomized controlled trials of any medical condition or mental disorder comparing OLPs to no treatment were included. Data extraction and risk of bias rating were independently assessed. 1246 records were screened and thirteen studies were included into the systematic review. Eleven trials were eligible for meta-analysis. These trials assessed effects of OLPs on back pain, cancer-related fatigue, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, allergic rhinitis, major depression, irritable bowel syndrome and menopausal hot flushes. Risk of bias was moderate among all studies. We found a significant overall effect (standardized mean difference = 0.72, 95% Cl 0.39–1.05, p < 0.0001, I2 = 76%) of OLP. Thus, OLPs appear to be a promising treatment in different conditions but the respective research is in its infancy. More research is needed, especially with respect to different medical and mental disorders and instructions accompanying the OLP administration as well as the role of expectations and mindsets.

Download Full-text

Clinical effectiveness of convalescent plasma in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Therapeutic Advances in Respiratory Disease ◽

10.1177/17534666211028077 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 15 ◽

pp. 175346662110280

Author(s):

Roberto Ariel Abeldaño Zuñiga ◽

Ruth Ana María González-Villoria ◽

María Vanesa Elizondo ◽

Anel Yaneli Nicolás Osorio ◽

David Gómez Martínez ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Clinical Improvement ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Clinical Effectiveness ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Hospitalized Patients ◽

Low Risk ◽

Controlled Clinical Trials

Aims: Given the variability of previously reported results, this systematic review aims to determine the clinical effectiveness of convalescent plasma employed in the treatment of hospitalized patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of controlled clinical trials assessing treatment with convalescent plasma for hospitalized patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The outcomes were mortality, clinical improvement, and ventilation requirement. Results: A total of 51 studies were retrieved from the databases. Five articles were finally included in the data extraction and qualitative and quantitative synthesis of results. The overall risk of bias in the reviewed articles was established at low-risk only in two trials. The meta-analysis suggests that there is no benefit of convalescent plasma compared with standard care or placebo in reducing the overall mortality and the ventilation requirement. However, there could be a benefit for the clinical improvement in patients treated with plasma. Conclusion: Current results led to assume that the convalescent plasma transfusion cannot reduce the mortality or ventilation requirement in hospitalized patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. More controlled clinical trials conducted with methodologies that ensure a low risk of bias are still needed. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Download Full-text

Effects of Supervised Multimodal Exercise Interventions on Cancer-Related Fatigue: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BioMed Research International ◽

10.1155/2015/328636 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 2015 ◽

pp. 1-13 ◽

Cited By ~ 44

Author(s):

José Francisco Meneses-Echávez ◽

Emilio González-Jiménez ◽

Robinson Ramírez-Vélez

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Resistance Training ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Exercise Interventions ◽

Training Interventions ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Cancer Related Fatigue

Objective. Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is the most common and devastating problem in cancer patients even after successful treatment. This study aimed to determine the effects of supervised multimodal exercise interventions on cancer-related fatigue through a systematic review and meta-analysis.Design. A systematic review was conducted to determine the effectiveness of multimodal exercise interventions on CRF. Databases of PubMed, CENTRAL, EMBASE, and OVID were searched between January and March 2014 to retrieve randomized controlled trials. Risk of bias was evaluated using the PEDro scale.Results. Nine studiesn=772were included in both systematic review and meta-analysis. Multimodal interventions including aerobic exercise, resistance training, and stretching improved CRF symptoms (SMD=-0.23; 95% CI: −0.37 to −0.09;P=0.001). These effects were also significant in patients undergoing chemotherapyP<0.0001. Nonsignificant differences were found for resistance training interventionsP=0.30. Slight evidence of publication bias was observedP=0.04. The studies had a low risk of bias (PEDro scale mean score of 6.4 (standard deviation (SD) ± 1.0)).Conclusion. Supervised multimodal exercise interventions including aerobic, resistance, and stretching exercises are effective in controlling CRF. These findings suggest that these exercise protocols should be included as a crucial part of the rehabilitation programs for cancer survivors and patients during anticancer treatments.

Download Full-text