Trial reportGynecologic oncology2025
Fit4Surgery: A pilot randomized controlled trial to assess the feasibility of prehabilitation prior to debulking surgery for ovarian cancer.
Trial report in Gynecologic oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Nutritional prehabilitation strategies in abdominal surgery.Current opinion in clinical nutrition and metabolic care · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the feasibility of enrolling women with ovarian cancer in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a home-based, patient-tailored physical activity prehabilitation program (Fit4Surgery, F4S) and assess adherence while estimating effects on patient-reported outcomes (PROs), frailty, and physical function.
methodsThirty patients aged ≥60 with ovarian cancer, scheduled for neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery, were randomized 2:1 to Fit4Surgery or educational control. The intervention group received a Fitbit, access to the F4S app, and weekly coaching calls. Controls received educational calls and access to the Cancer.Net app. The primary outcome was feasibility, defined as >80 % evaluability and adherence. Daily steps and PROs were compared using paired t-tests or Wilcoxon rank sum tests.
resultsOf 74 patients approached, 32 consented and 30 were randomized. Average age was 69.7 years (range 60-81). Ninety percent of patients completed both baseline and pre-surgical assessments. Patients wore their FitBit on 94 % of days, attended 97 % of coaching calls, and engaged with the F4S app on 80 % of days. Patients reached personal step goals on 49 % of days, while 77.8 % of patients increased their daily steps over the intervention, with an average increase of 1804 steps per day (37 % increase, p = 0.01). Patient-reported physical function (p = 0.09) and frailty-related metrics, including energy levels (p = 0.01) and weekly walks (p = 0.02) improved in the F4S group, while no differences were detected in surgical outcomes.
conclusionsFit4Surgery was feasible with high engagement and adherence. Patients demonstrated increased daily step count and positive trends in PROs, frailty, and physical function.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.