Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32526771›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2020

Criteria for the determination of maximal oxygen uptake in patients newly diagnosed with cancer: Baseline data from the randomized controlled trial of physical training and cancer (Phys-Can).

Ann Christin Helgesen Bjørke, Truls Raastad, Sveinung Berntsen

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. The effect of quercetin and citrulline on cycling time trial performance.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2024
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Evaluation of Valid VOInternational journal of exercise science · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ann Christin Helgesen BjørkeDepartment of Sport Science and Physical Education, University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-5238-9826
Truls RaastadDepartment of Sport Science and Physical Education, University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway.
Sveinung BerntsenDepartment of Sport Science and Physical Education, University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway.
University of Agder · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMaximal oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]) is a measure of cardiorespiratory fitness often used to monitor changes in fitness during and after treatment in cancer patients. There is, however, limited knowledge in how criteria verifying [Formula: see text] work for patients newly diagnosed with cancer. Therefore, the aim of this study was to describe the prevalence of fulfillment of typical criteria verifying [Formula: see text] and to investigate the associations between the criteria and the test leader's evaluation whether a test was performed "to exhaustion". An additional aim was to establish new cut-points within the associated criteria.

methodsFrom the Phys-Can randomized controlled trial, 535 patients (59 ±12 years) newly diagnosed with breast (79%), prostate (17%) or colorectal cancer (4%) performed an incremental [Formula: see text] test on a treadmill. The test was performed before starting (neo-)adjuvant treatment and an exercise intervention. Fulfillment of different cut-points within typical criteria verifying [Formula: see text] was described. The dependent key variables included in the initial bivariate analysis were achievement of a [Formula: see text] plateau, peak values for maximal heart rate, respiratory exchange ratio (RER), the patients' rating of perceived exertion on Borg's scale6-20 and peak breathing frequency (fR). A receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to establish cut-points for variables associated with the test leader's evaluation. Last, a cross-validation of the cut-points found in the receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed on a comparable sample of cancer patients (n = 80).

resultsThe criteria RERpeak (<0.001), Borg's RPE (<0.001) and fR peak (p = 0.018) were associated with the test leader's evaluation of whether a test was defined as "to exhaustion". The cut-points that best predicted the test leader's evaluation were RER ≥ 1.14, RPE ≥ 18 and fR ≥ 40. Maximal heart rate and [Formula: see text] plateau was not associated with the test leader's evaluation.

conclusionWe recommend a focus on RER (in the range between ≥1.1 and ≥1.15) and RPE (≥17 or ≥18) in addition to the test leader's evaluation. Additionally, a fR peak of ≥40 breaths/min may be a cut-point to help the test leader evaluate the degree of exhaustion. However, more research is needed to verify our findings, and to investigate how these criteria will work within a population that are undergoing or finished with cancer treatment.

Indexed as

Exercise TherapyAgedCardiorespiratory FitnessCohort StudiesExercise TestFemaleHeart RateHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsOxygenOxygen ConsumptionPhysical ExertionReference ValuesROC CurveOxygen

Identifiers

PMID32526771
PMCPMC7289625
OpenAlexW3035328121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.