T Veni1, S Boyas1, B Beaune1, H Bourgeois2, A Rahmani1, S Landry2, A Bochereau1, S Durand1, B Morel3. 1. Laboratoire Motricité, Interactions, Performance, MIP - EA4334, Le Mans Université, Avenue Olivier Messiaen, 72085, Le Mans Cedex 9, France. 2. Inter-regional Institute of Cancerology Jean Bernard, Le Mans, France. 3. Laboratoire Motricité, Interactions, Performance, MIP - EA4334, Le Mans Université, Avenue Olivier Messiaen, 72085, Le Mans Cedex 9, France. baptiste.morel-prieur@univ-lemans.fr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: As a subjective symptom, cancer-related fatigue is assessed via patient-reported outcomes. Due to the inherent bias of such evaluation, screening and treatment for cancer-related fatigue remains suboptimal. The purpose is to evaluate whether objective cancer patients' hand muscle mechanical parameters (maximal force, critical force, force variability) extracted from a fatiguing handgrip exercise may be correlated to the different dimensions (physical, emotional, and cognitive) of cancer-related fatigue. METHODS: Fourteen women with advanced breast cancer, still under or having previously received chemotherapy within the preceding 3 months, and 11 healthy women participated to the present study. Cancer-related fatigue was first assessed through the EORTC QLQ-30 and its fatigue module. Fatigability was then measured during 60 maximal repeated handgrip contractions. The maximum force, critical force (asymptote of the force-time evolution), and force variability (root mean square of the successive differences) were extracted. Multiple regression models were performed to investigate the influence of the force parameters on cancer-related fatigue's dimensions. RESULTS: The multiple linear regression analysis evidenced that physical fatigue was best explained by maximum force and critical force (r = 0.81; p = 0.029). The emotional fatigue was best explained by maximum force, critical force, and force variability (r = 0.83; p = 0.008). The cognitive fatigue was best explained by critical force and force variability (r = 0.62; p = 0.035). CONCLUSION: The handgrip maximal force, critical force, and force variability may offer objective measures of the different dimensions of cancer-related fatigue and could provide a complementary approach to the patient reported outcomes.
PURPOSE: As a subjective symptom, cancer-related fatigue is assessed via patient-reported outcomes. Due to the inherent bias of such evaluation, screening and treatment for cancer-related fatigue remains suboptimal. The purpose is to evaluate whether objective cancerpatients' hand muscle mechanical parameters (maximal force, critical force, force variability) extracted from a fatiguing handgrip exercise may be correlated to the different dimensions (physical, emotional, and cognitive) of cancer-related fatigue. METHODS: Fourteen women with advanced breast cancer, still under or having previously received chemotherapy within the preceding 3 months, and 11 healthy women participated to the present study. Cancer-related fatigue was first assessed through the EORTC QLQ-30 and its fatigue module. Fatigability was then measured during 60 maximal repeated handgrip contractions. The maximum force, critical force (asymptote of the force-time evolution), and force variability (root mean square of the successive differences) were extracted. Multiple regression models were performed to investigate the influence of the force parameters on cancer-related fatigue's dimensions. RESULTS: The multiple linear regression analysis evidenced that physical fatigue was best explained by maximum force and critical force (r = 0.81; p = 0.029). The emotional fatigue was best explained by maximum force, critical force, and force variability (r = 0.83; p = 0.008). The cognitive fatigue was best explained by critical force and force variability (r = 0.62; p = 0.035). CONCLUSION: The handgrip maximal force, critical force, and force variability may offer objective measures of the different dimensions of cancer-related fatigue and could provide a complementary approach to the patient reported outcomes.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Force; Neuromuscular fatigue; Physical activity; Quality of life
Authors: Ann M Berger; Amy Pickar Abernethy; Ashley Atkinson; Andrea M Barsevick; William S Breitbart; David Cella; Bernadine Cimprich; Charles Cleeland; Mario A Eisenberger; Carmen P Escalante; Paul B Jacobsen; Phyllis Kaldor; Jennifer A Ligibel; Barbara A Murphy; Tracey O'Connor; William F Pirl; Eve Rodler; Hope S Rugo; Jay Thomas; Lynne I Wagner Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: C Russell Hendrix; Terry J Housh; Michelle Mielke; Jorge M Zuniga; Clayton L Camic; Glen O Johnson; Richard J Schmidt Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Jane A Kent-Braun; Damien M Callahan; Jessica L Fay; Stephen A Foulis; John P Buonaccorsi Journal: Muscle Nerve Date: 2013-06-06 Impact factor: 3.217
Authors: David C Poole; Mark Burnley; Anni Vanhatalo; Harry B Rossiter; Andrew M Jones Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Julienne E Bower; Kate Bak; Ann Berger; William Breitbart; Carmelita P Escalante; Patricia A Ganz; Hester Hill Schnipper; Christina Lacchetti; Jennifer A Ligibel; Gary H Lyman; Mohammed S Ogaily; William F Pirl; Paul B Jacobsen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-04-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Joanne E Mortimer; Sarah Waliany; Christina M Dieli-Conwright; Sunita K Patel; Arti Hurria; Joseph Chao; Brian Tiep; Carolyn E Behrendt Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-01-06 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: A Rahmani; B Morel; M Chartogne; A Leclercq; B Beaune; S Boyas; C Forestier; T Martin; V Thomas-Ollivier; S Landry; H Bourgeois; O Cojocarasu; V Pialoux; O Zanna; L A Messonnier Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2021-10-23 Impact factor: 4.430