Trial reportMedicine and science in sports and exercise2026
Long-Term Effects of High-Intensity Training after Lung Cancer Surgery-A 5-Yr Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 2026. 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.
- Highlights from the 2018 European Respiratory Society International Congress: sleep and clinical physiology.ERJ open research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate long-term extended effects of 20 wk of high-intensity training (HIT) performed shortly after lung cancer surgery on physical fitness, muscle mass, pulmonary function, quality of life (QoL), and survival.
methodsAll participants in the original HIT-trial were invited 5 yr after surgery. Original measures were repeated by the same technician and equipment. All-cause mortality was registered 5- and 10-yr postsurgery.
resultsOf 61 patients who completed the 20-wk intervention, 40 (66%) were alive at 5 yr and 32 (80% of survivors; HIT n = 15, standard of care (SoC) n = 17) completed follow-up testing. No significant between-group difference was observed in the primary outcome, peak oxygen uptake 5 yr after HIT (adjusted mean difference 1.13 mL·kg -1 ·min -1 , P = 0.576). Similarly, there were no between-group differences in physical function, muscle mass, pulmonary function, or QoL. In contrast, a significant sustainable difference in leg-press strength was observed in the HIT group compared with the SoC group (23 kg, P = 0.048). Regarding survival, 5-yr survival rates were similar between the HIT group (67%) and the SoC group (65%). Although the HIT group demonstrated a tendency toward longer median postoperative survival (60.0 ± 32.6 months, 95% confidence intervals: 43.2-76.8) compared with the SoC group (43.0 ± 33.5 months, 95% confidence intervals: 24.4-61.5), this difference was not statistically significant ( P = 0.760). At 10 yr, no differences in survival rates were observed between the groups.
conclusionsTwenty weeks of HIT after lung cancer surgery led to a significant effect in leg-press strength after 5 yr but showed no long-term effects on peak oxygen uptake, muscle mass, pulmonary function, QoL, or survival compared with SoC.
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.