ArticlePloS one2025
Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of heavy Lifting Strength Training versus Usual Care in Head and Neck Cancer Survivors (the LIFTING 2 Trial): A study protocol for a single-centre, phase II, randomized controlled trial.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite improvements in treatments, head and neck cancer survivors (HNCS) still endure acute and chronic side effects such as loss of muscular strength, limitations in physical function, fatigue, and swallowing difficulties that impact quality of life (QoL). Light-to-moderate intensity strength training (LMST) has been shown to improve some of these side effects. Heavy lifting strength training (HLST) may further improve outcomes, however, only one pilot study has focused on HNCS. The primary aim of this study is to further establish the feasibility of HLST in HNCS. A secondary aim is to provide preliminary evidence of the effects of a HLST program compared to Usual Care (UC) in HNCS.
methodsThis single-centre, two-armed, randomized controlled trial will aim to recruit 48 HNCS ≥1-year post-treatment, and randomly assign them to a 12-week Heavy Lifting Strength Training (HLST) group or Usual Care (UC) group. With 80% power, a two-tailed alpha of p < 0.05, and adjusting for covariates that explain 25% of the variance in the outcome, we will be able to detect a standardized effect size of 0.80 with 38 (19/group) evaluable HNCS, allowing for a 20% loss to follow-up. The HLST group will exercise twice weekly, progressing to lifting low repetitions of heavy loads at 80% to 100% of maximal perceived exertion, whereas the UC group will not receive any exercise prescription or instruction during the 12-week intervention. The primary efficacy outcome will be upper and lower body muscular strength assessed by 3RM tests. Secondary efficacy outcomes will include health-related fitness and patient-reported outcomes assessed with reliable physical assessments and validated questionnaires. SIGNIFICANCE: Our findings will answer the important question of whether lifting heavier weights is feasible for HNCS and leads to better outcomes compared to lifting no weights. The results will inform future studies comparing exercise intensities in HNCS and other cancer populations.
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.