Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Psychooncology. 2019 Nov 24. doi: 10.1002/pon.5298. [Epub ahead of print]

Effects of the ACTIVity And TEchnology (ACTIVATE) intervention on health-related quality of life and fatigue outcomes in breast cancer survivors.

Author information

1
Faculty of Health Disciplines, Athabasca University, Athabasca, Alberta, Canada.
2
Cancer Epidemiology Division, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
3
Medical Oncology, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
4
Department of Medicine, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
5
School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
6
Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington.
7
Australian Centre for Precision Health, School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
8
Department of General Practice, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
9
Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Research, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
10
Departments of Oncology and Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
11
Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
12
Physical Activity Laboratory, Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The ACTIVATE Trial examined the efficacy of a wearable-based intervention to increase physical activity and reduce sedentary behavior in breast cancer survivors. This paper examines the effects of the intervention on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and fatigue at 12 weeks (T2; end of intervention) and 24 weeks (T3; follow-up).

METHODS:

Inactive and postmenopausal women who had completed primary treatment for stage I-III breast cancer were randomized to intervention or waitlist control. Physical activity and sedentary behavior were measured by Actigraph and activPAL accelerometers at baseline (T1), end of the intervention (T2), and 12 weeks follow-up (T3). HRQoL and fatigue were measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) and the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue). Primary intervention effects were evaluated comparing intervention and waitlist group at T2 using repeated measures mixed effects models.

RESULTS:

Overall, 83 women were randomized and trial retention was high (94%). A 4.6-point difference in fatigue score was observed between groups at T2 (95% CI: 1.3, 7.8) indicating improvement in fatigue profiles in the intervention group. In within groups analyses, the intervention group reported a 5.1-point increase in fatigue from baseline to T2 (95% CI: 2.0, 8.2) and a 3.3-point increase from baseline to T3 (95% CI: 0.1, 6.41).

CONCLUSIONS:

Despite small improvements in fatigue profiles, no effects on HRQoL were observed. While the ACTIVATE Trial was associated with improvements in physical activity and sedentary behavior, more intensive or longer duration interventions may be needed to facilitate changes in HRQoL.

KEYWORDS:

breast cancer; eHealth; fatigue; physical activity; quality of life; sedentary time

PMID:
31763746
DOI:
10.1002/pon.5298

Supplemental Content

Loading ...
Support Center