Richard A Bell1,2, James C Baldi2, Lynnette M Jones3. 1. School of Physical Education, Sport & Exercise Sciences, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand. 2. Department of Medicine, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. 3. School of Physical Education, Sport & Exercise Sciences, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand. lynnette.jones@otago.ac.nz.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Cardiovascular disease, often secondary to chemotherapy, is the leading cause of death in BC survivors. Increased aerobic capacity improves post-rehabilitation survival; however, many cancer rehabilitation programs are limited to lower intensity training. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is associated with the largest improvements in aerobic capacity; therefore, this study aimed to determine whether HIIT would cause a greater increase in VO2peak than continuous moderate-intensity (MICT) exercise in previously trained BC survivors. METHODS:Twenty BC survivors who had completed a low/moderate-intensity exercise rehabilitation program performed aVO2peak test and received a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan at baseline and after randomization into a 12-week HIIT or MICT program. ANOVA with repeated measures determined the effects of the different training programs on aerobic capacity and body composition. RESULTS: Both groups began the training program near or above age- and sex-matched VO2peak norms. Pre- to post-intervention improvements in VO2peak (P = 0.006) and waist circumference (P = 0.007) were found in both groups; however, there were no between-group differences. Minute ventilation and peak workload increased in the HIIT group (P < 0.05) but not the MICT group. Body composition was not different after either training program. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that transitioning from low/moderate-intensity exercise to moderate/high-intensity exercise causes further clinically relevant increases in VO2peak in previously trained BC survivors. HIIT did not cause a significantly greater improvement in VO2peak than MICT; however, future studies with greater intensity and frequency of training are encouraged.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE:Cardiovascular disease, often secondary to chemotherapy, is the leading cause of death in BC survivors. Increased aerobic capacity improves post-rehabilitation survival; however, many cancer rehabilitation programs are limited to lower intensity training. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is associated with the largest improvements in aerobic capacity; therefore, this study aimed to determine whether HIIT would cause a greater increase in VO2peak than continuous moderate-intensity (MICT) exercise in previously trained BC survivors. METHODS: Twenty BC survivors who had completed a low/moderate-intensity exercise rehabilitation program performed a VO2peak test and received a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan at baseline and after randomization into a 12-week HIIT or MICT program. ANOVA with repeated measures determined the effects of the different training programs on aerobic capacity and body composition. RESULTS: Both groups began the training program near or above age- and sex-matched VO2peak norms. Pre- to post-intervention improvements in VO2peak (P = 0.006) and waist circumference (P = 0.007) were found in both groups; however, there were no between-group differences. Minute ventilation and peak workload increased in the HIIT group (P < 0.05) but not the MICT group. Body composition was not different after either training program. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that transitioning from low/moderate-intensity exercise to moderate/high-intensity exercise causes further clinically relevant increases in VO2peak in previously trained BC survivors. HIIT did not cause a significantly greater improvement in VO2peak than MICT; however, future studies with greater intensity and frequency of training are encouraged.
Entities:
Keywords:
Body composition; Breast cancer; HIIT training; VO2peak
Authors: Camilla J Williams; Brendon J Gurd; Jacob T Bonafiglia; Sarah Voisin; Zhixiu Li; Nicholas Harvey; Ilaria Croci; Jenna L Taylor; Trishan Gajanand; Joyce S Ramos; Robert G Fassett; Jonathan P Little; Monique E Francois; Christopher M Hearon; Satyam Sarma; Sylvan L J E Janssen; Emeline M Van Craenenbroeck; Paul Beckers; Véronique A Cornelissen; Nele Pattyn; Erin J Howden; Shelley E Keating; Anja Bye; Dorthe Stensvold; Ulrik Wisloff; Ioannis Papadimitriou; Xu Yan; David J Bishop; Nir Eynon; Jeff S Coombes Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2019-02-05 Impact factor: 4.566