Abstract
Background
The diagnosis and treatment of cancer are highly stressful. Exercise therapy is often used to mitigate the adverse effects of treatment. But how good is the evidence base, and what has changed in recent years? In this narrative review, we present the current data and what it implies for the care of adults with cancer.
Methods
This review is based on data from meta-analyses and systematic reviews concerning 16 relevant clinical endpoints (outcomes) of exercise therapy for cancer patients.
Results
The literature evaluated for this paper reveals that targeted exercise therapy is feasible and safe under appropriate supervision. It is highly effective for improving eight endpoints (anxiety, depression, fatigue, quality of life, physical function, secondary lymphedema after breast cancer, urinary incontinence, post-mastectomy pain syndrome in breast cancer) and may also have a beneficial effect on sleep quality, cardiotoxicity, and cognitive function. Less conclusive studies are currently available with respect to chemotherapy-induced polyneuropathy, nausea/vomiting, and bone health. There is currently insufficient data to suggest any benefit with respect to sexual function and risk factors for falling.
Conclusion
The data shows that exercise therapy for cancer patients is safe and has manifold effects on selected clinically relevant parameters. Further studies should be performed regarding the possible utility of exercise therapy against treatment-related side effects for which the evidence is currently insufficient. On the basis of the currently available and already existing recommendations, quality-assured exercise therapy can be recommended to cancer patients suffering from a wide range of neoplastic conditions.
CME plus+
This article has been certified by the North Rhine Academy for Continuing Medical Education. The questions on this article may be found at http://daebl.de/RY95. The closing date for entries is May 16, 2025.
Participation is possible at cme.aerzteblatt.de
In Germany, about half a million persons receive a cancer diagnosis every year. According to the Robert Koch-Institute, 232 720 women and 265 170 men were diagnosed with cancer in 2018 (1). Cancer patients’ survival rates have substantially improved as a result of advances in multimodal treatment options (2). Almost two thirds of those affected survive beyond 5 years after the initial diagnosis (1). Simultaneously, however, somatic and psychological acute sequelae occur, as well as late and long-term sequelae, which can mean a notably worsened quality of life (3).
Potential biological mechanisms
Preclinical studies have shown the effect of exercise on blood parameters such as circulating immune cells, sexual hormones, insulin and glucose concentrations, and lipid metabolism (4). Studies in humans evaluating direct effects on the tumor micromilieu in vivo are, however, lacking. The influence is complex: a multitude of specific biological effects in patients with cancer combine and interact (Figure 1). Many mechanistic questions require further research and clarification—especially also in primary tumor tissue and in clinical-translational studies.
Figure 1.
Mode/mechanism of action of exercise therapy in oncology and selected potential mechanisms
AMP, adenosine monophosphate; BDNF, brain derived neurotrophic factor; CTX, chemotherapy; ROM, range of motion“
Exercise therapy as a supportive measure
In recent years, research has led to a better understanding of the positive and multidimensional effects of exercise therapy in the oncology setting. Study results have confirmed safe use in terms of feasibility and especially in the prevention and reduction of different therapy-relevant adverse effects and improvements to quality of life (Figure 2) (5). This paper investigates how effective exercise therapy actually is as regards individual adverse effects of the cancer disease and therapy and where its currents limitations are.
Figure 2.
Oncological exercise therapy in the sectors
(Figure: Petra Wirtz, German Sport University Cologne, 2020)
Methods
We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for internationally published key publications on oncological exercise therapy that were published between (and including) January 2018 through April 2023. The literature search was reviewed by two independent reviewers (F.T.B., M.L.). The selection criteria and all identified review articles are listed in the eTable.
eTable. Relevant clinical endpoints taking into account selected meta-analyses and systematic reviews.
| Result/author (year) | No of cases (N) | Effect size (improvement [95% CI]) | Exercise intervention |
|
Anxiety Singh et al. (2020) (7) |
695 (lung cancer) |
Reduced anxiety SMD: 0.26 [0.11; 0.42] | Supervised endurance training, strength/weight training (mild to moderate intensity, mostly ≤ 12 weeks’ duration) |
|
Depression Singh et al. (2020) (7) |
695 (lung cancer) |
Reduced depression SMD: 0.49 [0.27; 0.72] | Supervised endurance training, strength/weight training (mild to moderate intensity, mostly ≤ 12 weeks’ duration) |
|
Fatigue Belloni et al.(2021) (8) |
16 143 (diverse entities) |
Reduced fatigue SMD: −0.33 [−0.43; −0.23] | Aerobic/anaerobic training and strength/weight training; 1–6 × per week over 2–52 weeks (10–120 min), moderate to high intensity |
|
Quality of life Aune et al. (2022) (9) |
14 554 (breast cancer) |
Improved global health related quality of life in women with breast cancer; WMD: 5.94, [2.64; 9.24] |
Moderate endurance training and strength/weight training |
|
Secondary lymphedema after breast cancer Hasenoehrl et al. (2020) (10) |
666 (breast cancer) |
Reduction in breast cancer associated lymphedema as measured using bioimpedance spectroscopy (L-Dex score): −1.10 [−2.19; −0.01] | Strength/weight training 2–3 × per week, with increasing intensity |
|
Physical functioning Andersen et al. (2022) (11) |
4 493 (breast cancer) |
Exercise showed moderate effects on the primary results of physical functioning (EORTC QLQ C30, SF-36, FACT-B), SMD: 0.52 [0.38; 0.66] | Endurance training and strength/weight training seem to improve physical functioning more than mere endurance or strength/weight training; supervised training more effective than non-supervised |
|
Urinary incontinence Baumann et al. (2021) (12) |
2 188 (prostate cancer) |
Reduction of the risk for urinary incontinence depending on the duration of training after prostatectomy - Up to 3 months: 20 % [12; 28] - Months 3-6: 25 % [18; 33] - 6 months: 12 % [4; 20] |
Sphincter training under instruction: recommendation of 3–4 exercise units per day with 10–15 contractions each time (duration of contraction 5–10 s, duration of relaxation 10–20 s); exercises can be done while sitting down, lying down, or standing up. |
|
Post-mastectomy pain syndrome in breast cancer Kannan et al. (2022) (13) |
406 (breast cancer) |
Significant pain reduction SMD: −1.00 [−1.48; −0.52] |
Endurance training, strength/weight training for the upper and lower limbs and trunk muscles, hydrotherapy, stretching and nerve mobilization exercises |
|
Sleep quality Yang et al. (2021) (14) |
121 (breast cancer) |
Overall score in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) did not reach significance; positive effect for sleep quality sub-scale SMD: 0.22 [0.04; 0.40] | Walking, intensive endurance training, combined endurance training, strength/weight training for 6, 12, or 24 weeks |
|
Cognitive functioning Fang et al. (2020) (15) |
639 (prostate cancer) |
Improved cognitive functioning, Hedges’ g: 0.35 [0.19; 0.52] |
Supervised endurance training, strength/weight training of moderate intensity, with a duration of the program of at least 12 weeks |
|
Cardiotoxicity Ma et al. (2022) (16) |
364 (breast cancer) |
Improved VO2 peak (MD: 5.56 [2.69; 8.43]) and E/A ratio (MD: 0.22 [0.11; 0.34]) | Combined endurance training, strength/weight training, duration 8–16 weeks |
|
Bone health Rose et al. (2022) (17) |
2 329 (diverse entities) |
Improved bone mineral density on the hip (ES: 0.112 [0.026; 0.198]) and lumbar spine (ES: 0.269 [0.036; 0.50] | Strength/weight training or impact-training, endurance training, and impact training |
|
CIPN Guo et al. (2022) (19) |
1. n = 145 2. n = 45 3. n = 47 4. n = 76 5. n = 55 6. n = 119 (diverse entities) |
Significant improvement of the following CIPN parameters: 1. Sensitivity/reflexes (SMD: 0.02 [−0.41; 0.44]) 2. Pain (MD: −4.93 [−5.60; −4.26]) 3. Balance (SMD: 1.05, [0.62; 1.48]) 4. Muscle strength, upper limb (SMD: 1.10 [0.68; 1.51]) 5. Muscle strength, lower limb (SMD: 0.84 [0.42; 1.26]) 6. Quality of life (SMD: 0.83 [0.58; 1.08]) |
Endurance, strength/weight, balance, and sensorimotor training |
|
Nausea/vomiting Nakano et al. (2018) (20) |
849 (diverse entities) |
Difference for nausea/vomiting between intervention and control groups did not reach significance(SMD: −0.09 [−0.24; 0.06]) | Endurance, strength/weight, stretching, and gait training |
|
Nausea/vomiting Chen et al. (2023) (21) |
715 (breast) |
Significant difference in favor of exercise therapy (Hedges’ g: −0.35 [−0.60; −0.10] | Endurance, strength/weight, stretching, and gait training, yoga |
|
Sexual functioning Barcellini et al. (2021) (22) |
142 (gynecological tumors) |
1 RCT (n = 28): significant improvement in PFM strength (p = 0.036) and sexual functioning (p = 0.048) in the PFM training group; MD between groups (intervention versus control) improved PFM strength (MD: 14.22; p = 0.036) | Physiotherapeutic sphincter training compared with controls (no treatment, standard care, sham treatment, placebo, usual care, or active control) for pain in women with sexual dysfunction |
|
Risk factors for falls Williams et al. [2018] (23) (Cochrane Review) |
1a. n = 72 1b. n = 388 1c. n = 214 2. n = 21 3a. n = 127 3b. n = 280 3c. n = 15 (diverse entities) |
Reduction in several risk factors for falls: 1a. MD: 8.99 kg [1.29; 16.70] 1b. MD: 21.1 kg [8.47; 33.74] 1c. SMD: −0.45 [−1.05; 0.14], no difference 2. MD: 2.05 cm [0.59; 3.51] 3a. SMD: 0.44 [0.08; 0.79] 3b. SMD: −0.24 [−0.48; –0.01] 3c. SMD: −0.35 [−1.47; 0.77], no difference |
Strength/weight training, endurance training, mobility training, sensorimotor training, and balance training 1. Strength (1a. quadriceps; 1b. led press; 1c. sit-to-stand test) 2. Flexibility 3. Balance (3a. postural balance; 3b. backwards walking test; 3c. timed-up-and-go test) |
CIPN, chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy; E/A ratio, measuring flow velocity into the mitral valve; EORTC QLQ C30, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire; ES, effect size; FACT-B, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – Breast; Hedges’ g, statistical index/measurement regarding effect size (for example, denotes the size of the difference between the intervention and control groups, and simultaneously statistically corrects for the uneven group sizes of both groups); CI, confidence interval; L-Dex score, difference in the volume of extracellular fluid in a limb at risk compared with a limb not at risk; MD, mean difference; PFM, pelvic floor muscles; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SF-36, Short Form (SF)-36; SMD, standardized mean difference; VO2 peak, maximum oxygen intake; WMD, weighted mean difference
We identified 16 relevant endpoints by clinical relevance and the expected therapeutic benefit of exercise therapy. Each of the 16 endpoints was allocated a recent key publication—a meta-analysis in preference, and where none existed, a systematic review.
The following is a list of the decisive characteristics of the quality criteria for the evidence:
The topicality
The number of subjects in the systematic reviews (n=≥/<150)
The effect size (effect close to 0)
The heterogeneity of the effects
Further methodological characteristics (6).
This quality assessment differs from the often used risk of bias assessment.
Results
We describe the current clinically relevant endpoints of exercise therapy in the oncological setting. Table 1 and the eTable show a detailed overview of the results of this narrative review.
Table 1. Relevant clinical endpoints taking into account selected meta-analyses and systematic reviews.
| Result | No of cases (N) type of cancer | Effect size (improvement [95% CI]) | Exercise intervention |
| Anxiety (7) | 695 (lung) | SMD: 0,26 [0,11; 0,42] | Endurance training, strength/weight training |
| Depression (7) | 695 (lung) | SMD: 0,49 [0,27; 0,72] | Endurance training, strength/weight training |
| Fatigue (8) | 16 143 (diverse) | SMD: −0,33 [−0,43; 0,23] | Aerobic/anaerobic training, Strength/weight training |
| Quality of life (9) | 14 554 (breast) | WMD: 5,94 [2,64; 9,24] | Endurance training, strength/weight training |
| Secondary lymphedema after breast cancer (10) | 666 (breast) | L-Dex Score: −1,10 [−2,19; 0,01] | Strength/weight training |
| Physical functioning (11) | 4 493 (breast) | SMD: 0.52 [0.38; 0.66] | Endurance training, strength/weight training |
| Urinary incontinence (12) | 2 188 (prostate) | Risk differences: < 3 months: 20 % [12; 28]; 3–6 months: 25 % [18; 33]; > 6 months: 12 % [4; 20] | Sphincter training |
| Post-mastectomy pain syndrome (13) | 406 (breast) | SMD: −1.00 [−1.48; 0.52] | Endurance training, strength/weight training; stretching and neural mobilization |
| Sleep (14) | 121 (breast) | SMD: 0.22 [0.04; 0.40] | Endurance training, strength/weight training |
| Cognitive functions (15) | 639 (prostate) | Hedges’ g: 0.35 [0.12; 0.58] | Endurance training, strength/weight training |
| Cardiotoxicity (16) | 364 (breast) | VO2 peak MD: 5.56 [2.69; 8.43], E/A ratio MD: 0.22 [0.11; 0.34] |
Endurance training, strength/weight training |
| Bone health (17) | 2 329 (diverse) | ES: 0.112 [0.026; 0.198] (hip) ES: 0.269 [0.036; 0.501] (LS) |
Endurance, strength/weight, and impact training |
| CIPN (19) | 1. n = 145 2. n = 45 3. n = 47 4. n = 76 5. n = 55 6. n = 119 (diverse) |
1. Sensitivity/reflexes SMD: 0.02 [−0.41; 0.44] 2. Pain MD: −4.93 [−5.60; −4.26] 3. Balance SMD: 1.05 [0.62; 1.48] 4. Strength (upper limb) SMD: 1.10 [0.68; 1.51] 5. Strength (lower limb) SMD: 0.84 [0.42; 1.26] 6. Quality of life SMD: 0.83 [0.58; 1.08] |
Endurance, strength/weight, balance, and sensorimotor training |
| Nausea/vomiting (20) | 849 (diverse) | SMD: −0.09 [−0.24; 0.06] | Endurance, strength/weight, stretching, and gait training |
| Nausea/vomiting (21) | 715 (breast) | Hedges’s g: −0.35 [−0.60; −0.10] | Endurance, strength/weight, stretching, and gait training, yoga |
CIPN, chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy; E/A ratio, measuring flow velocity into the mitral valve; ES, effect size;
Hedges’ g, statistical index/measurement regarding effect size (for example, denotes the size of the difference between the intervention and control groups, and simultaneously statistically corrects the uneven group sizes of both groups b); CI, confidence interval; L-Dex score, difference in the volume of extracellular fluid in an extremity/limb at risk compared with an extremity/limb not at risk; LS; lumbar spine; MD, mean difference;
SMD, standardized mean difference; VO2 peak, maximum oxygen intake; WMD, weighted mean difference
Anxiety and depression
A meta-analysis of the reduction of anxiety (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.26, 95% confidence interval [011; 0.42]) and depression (SMD: 0.49 [0.27; 0.72]) showed effects for different forms of exercise of light to moderate intensity (endurance and strength/weight training) in patients with lung cancer (7). Of 36 included studies, 23 were of high quality.
Fatigue symptoms
Furthermore, studies included in a systematic review indicated that an adapted training program, consisting of endurance training or combined endurance and strength/weight training, reduced symptoms of fatigue (SMD: -0.33 [-0.43; –0.23] during and after cancer treatment. This applied particularly to women with breast cancer (SMD: -0.36 [-0.57; -0.15]) or men with prostate cancer (SMD: -0.34 [-0.45; -0.22]) (8).
Quality of life
A meta-analysis of 79 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) described that physical activity improved health related quality of life (weighted mean difference [WMD]: 5.94 [2.64; 9.24]) (9).
Secondary lymphedema after breast cancer
A review of six RCTs showed a significant reduction in cancer related lymphedema as a result of strength/weight training (L-Dex score -1.10 [-2.19; –0.01]). Negative effects of strength training on secondary lymphedema were not identified (10).
Physical functioning
A meta-analysis of 44 RCTs confirmed the effect of controlled sports therapy intervention on physical functioning (improvements to subjectively assessed performance). Exercise showed moderate effects on the primary results of physical functioning (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire [EORTC QLQ C30], Short Form [SF]-36 [SF-36], Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – Breast [FACT-B]; SMD: 0.52 [0.38; 0.66]) (11). Because of substantial heterogeneity (79.2%) the level of certainty of the results in this review was downgraded.
Urinary incontinence
According to a recent meta-analysis including 20 RCTs, targeted sphincter training reduced the risk of urinary incontinence in prostate cancer patients after prostatectomy. Compared with no training, sphincter training resulted in a risk reduction of 12–25% regarding the regression of urinary incontinence three months (20% [12; 28]), three to six months (25% [18;33]), and more than six months (12% [4; 20]) after prostatectomy (12).
Post-mastectomy pain syndrome in breast cancer
A meta-analysis including six RCTs described a significant reduction in pain (SMD: -1.00 [-1.48; -0.52]) in women with shoulder pain associated with a mastectomy (13), as a result of exercise therapy.
Sleep quality
There are indications that endurance training or combined endurance and strength/weight training can improve the sleep quality in women with breast cancer. Studies with a larger sample size are required to confirm this (14).
Cognitive functioning
To date, few studies have investigated whether exercise training improves cognitive functioning in patients with cancer. The combined results of a meta-analysis including 10 RCTs showed an overall positive effect of exercise on cognitive functioning (Hedges’ g: 0.35 [0.19; 0.52]) in men with prostate cancer compared with a control group.
Cardiotoxicity
A combination of endurance and strength/weight training has the potential to significantly improve cardiorespiratory fitness (VO2max) as well as left atrial and left ventricular diastolic function (E/A ratio) in women with breast cancer who are being treated with anthracyclines or trastuzumab. This helps alleviate cardiotoxic adverse effects of the treatment (16).
Bone health
Strength and endurance training, combined with impact training (targeted thrusts and pushes, such as double leg hops in place, single leg jumps, and skipping) improved bone mineral density of the hip and spine. Such effects seem more pronounced in women than in men (17). In spite of promising results it needs to be borne in mind that the assessment is currently strongly influenced by the results of premenopausal women from the working group of Saarto (18).
Chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy
Some studies indicate that combined training improves physical functioning (balance control and muscle strength), neuropathic pain, and quality of life in patients who are experiencing cancer and chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). Sensory functioning and reflex status, however, remain unaffected (19).
Nausea/vomiting
A meta-analysis by Nakano et al, which included nine RCTs and a mixed oncological disease spectrum showed an advantage in favor of an exercise therapy intervention to prevent nausea and vomiting (20) that didn’t reach significance (p=0.09). A more recent meta-analysis by Chen et al focused exclusively on patients with breast cancer and included eight RCTs and described as significant advantage of targeted physical exercise for the outcome nausea and vomiting (21).
Sexual functioning
Regarding sexual dysfunction as an adverse effect in urological or gynecological tumors, data are lacking to assess the effectiveness of sport and exercise training in the context of these impairments (22).
Risk factors for falls
A selected systematic review including 11 studies showed that exercise training improves important factors of influence to prevent falls in patients with cancer. These factors of influence include—among others—muscle weakness, balance impairments, and restricted mobility. It is not known whether exercise treatment can reduce the rate of falls as such in persons with and after cancer disease (23).
Current exercise recommendations
Neither cancer specific kinds of sport nor interventions can be defined on a “once size fits all” basis; no general recommendation for certain types of sport can therefore be formulated.
In principle, moderate endurance training, such as walking quickly, cycling, or swimming, in combination with strength/weight exercises, has been found to be safe and easy to carry out. The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) recommends generally for cancer patients moderate to strenuous endurance training three times a week for at least 30 minutes over a time period of at least 8–12 weeks. The intensity imposed on patients can be guided and monitored by using the Borg scale (reference range: 6–20), which can be used to measure subjectively experienced exhaustion and dyspnea. The intensity should be at 12–13 (moderate strenuous). Furthermore, strength/weight training with 8–15 repetitions at 60% of the one repetition maximum (1-RM) should be undertaken twice a week. If a patient has a medically stated need for exercise therapy, supervised, quality assured sports therapy and/or physical therapy is recommended in addition to the named everyday activities. The content of exercise therapy is guided by the specific adverse effects and consider so called FITT (frequency, intensity, time, type) criteria. These criteria enable more targeted and effective therapy for the patients (24).
Nationwide information networks provide information on specific services for exercise therapy for adults—for example, the network OnkoAktiv. Billable, quality assured types of care—such as oncological training and exercise (OTT)—are in development and are being extended. In addition to targeted quality assured exercise therapy, keeping up daily activities is also recommended, as in the German clinical practice (S3) guideline for breast cancer (25). Even in 2010 patients with cancer were advised to avoid inactivity and sedentary behavior. The World Health Organization currently recommends this for persons with chronic diseases in general (26).
Contraindications and safety
Exercise therapy in oncology is considered safe and effective. But in principle, there is a risk of sports injuries, which means that undesirable events may occur. These are extremely rare and can be minimized by qualified instruction and monitoring of the exercise therapy. For this reason different specific health related components—such as heart disease, metastases, medication, and prior experiences with exercise should be borne in mind when developing and implementing a safe oncological therapeutic concept (Table 2).
Table 2. An approach to care recommendations for cancer patients to reduce exercise therapeutic undesirable events.
| Symptom burden of patients/recommendations | Recommendations |
| No symptoms/comorbidities | No further sports medical examinations required: general treatment recommendations according to ACSM guidelines |
| Moderate symptoms (for example, CIPN, lymphedema) | Sports medical examination is recommended: training recommendations adapted on the basis of the results of the examination |
| Severe symptoms (for example, major surgery of the lungs or abdomen, cardiovascular disorders, severe fatigue, bone metastases) | Sports medical examination and doctor’s permission required before starting the training; training only under supervision by skilled personnel |
ACSM, American College of Sports Medicine; CIPN, chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy
According to Baumann and Schüle (27), the following are absolute contraindications to participating in exercise therapy:
Severe infection
Cardiovascular symptoms, impaired consciousness, vertigo/dizziness, severe nausea, vomiting
Acute bleeds, severe pain
Laboratory results: hemoglobin (Hb) <8g/dL with dizziness, thrombocyte counts <10 000/µL
< 48 h after cardiotoxic chemotherapy no vigorous exercise.
Challenges to the practical implementation of exercise therapy studies
Because of lacking routine services for oncological exercise therapy, study related patient recruitment may be subject to positive selection—participants with a greater interest in exercise programs may be more prepared to participate in studies. Furthermore, insights from exercise studies with a high proportion of breast cancer patients are not immediately generalizable to other entities (28, 29).
To ensure the motivation for and adherence to participation in exercise therapy studies in all cancer patients, the following measures in the studies have been found to be effective on the basis of the authors’ own experiences:
Education about and recommendation of physical activity by the treating medical staff
Individual and supervised exercise therapy
Shared decision making even when planning the therapeutic intervention
Regular, mandatory appointments for adapting/ adjusting the therapy.
These measures led to up to 80% adherence in exercise studies (30).
Further limitations in conducting exercise therapy studies are the inability to blind participants when allocation them to groups as well as ethical considerations, which do not allow for ruling out or restricting physical training in the control group.
Discussion
This narrative review aims to provide an updated overview of the evidence supporting exercise therapy in the context of cancer specific effects and adverse effects.
As in the 2019 ACSM guidelines, the evidence level is high regarding the positive effect of targeted exercise therapy for anxiety, depression, fatigue, quality of life, secondary lymphedema after breast cancer, and physical functioning. The interpretation as “high level evidence” does, however, not meet the usual criteria for evidence, such as risk of bias analyses, which require blinding, for example. The reported prevalence of adverse effects is 10–30% and for fatigue up to 80% (31). An earlier Cochrane article from 2018 on this subject, especially in breast cancer, critically remarks that only a slight to moderate positive effect of exercise on quality of life was shown. These positive results should be interpreted with caution because of the low to moderate quality of the evidence, the heterogeneity of the interventions and event measurements, and the risk of bias in many studies (32).
Recent meta-analyses have shown a high degree of effectiveness of supervised sphincter training to prevent urinary incontinence, which occurred more rarely (12–25% risk difference). Because of the high prevalence of urinary incontinence as a long-term sequela it is of particular importance to translate this information and recommendation into clinical practice in a timely fashion. An additional innovation is that exercise therapy improves the severity of pain in women with breast cancer (post-mastectomy pain syndrome in breast cancer).
Potential evidence was formulated for cognitive functioning, cardiotoxicity, and sleep quality. Sleep quality has an important position in this as the prevalence of sleeplessness in cancer patients whose disease was newly diagnosed or recently treated was 30–75%. In advanced cancer, sleep quality is impaired up to 50% (33). Of note: fewer than five RCTs were available for the evaluation of cognitive functioning and cardiotoxicity; the results should therefore be interpreted with caution.
Exercise studies of chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy, falls, pain, and nausea were evaluated on the basis of limited or insufficient evidence. At this point in time, however, we identified a robust meta-analysis for women with breast cancer. This showed a positive effect of exercise therapy on nausea and vomiting. Possible explanations for why the data on nausea and vomiting are not clearer include optimized antiemetic treatment and changes to systemic therapy protocols over the years, but also the heterogeneity of the exercise programs.
Children and adolescents develop cancer disease in far fewer cases than adults (approximately 2200 cases in Germany per year) (34). The evidence of exercise therapy on cancer specific adverse effects is lower-level (35). Undesirable treatment effects often affect childhood cancer survivors their whole lifetime. For this reason, management of adverse effects, tolerability of treatment, quality of life, and consideration/prevention of acute and late sequelae are therefore of particular importance in this age group and are the subject of an individual S2K (consensus based) guideline (AWMF registry number 025–036).
Limitations
Limitations of this review are in particular the relevant key publication, which in part relate only to certain cancer entities and sexes, with the result that it was not possible to evaluate the evidence in a more differentiated manner. Furthermore, we note critically that we carried out a narrative review, not a systematic review. Overall, we were therefore able only to formulate limited conclusions regarding the evidence. A systematic literature search is currently being implemented in the development of the S3 (clinical practice) guideline for exercise therapy in cancer disease. This will enable more valid conclusions regarding the evidence (36).
Conclusions and outlook
Based on the current evidence and inclusion in S3 and S2K guidelines, nationwide healthcare structures should be created for exercise therapy measures in cancer patients in all age groups. Not only patients having medical treatment and rehabilitation should be considered but also long-term survivors. Additionally, further research is needed, especially into mechanisms, prehabilitation, and palliative medicine, so as to test the effectiveness of exercise therapy in these settings too. Similarly, therapy related adverse effects for which sufficient evidence is currently lacking should also be the subject of future studies.
Questions on the article in issue 10/2025:
Exercise Therapy in Oncology
The submission deadline is 16 May 2025. Only one answer is possible per question.
Please select the answer that is most appropriate.
Question 1
According to the article, how many cancer diagnoses are made in Germany every year?
About 150 000
About 250 000
About 500 000
About 750 000
About 950 000
Question 2
In the article, what is measured using the L-DEX Score?
Fatigue after lung cancer
Quality of life after breast cancer
The intensity of pain after breast cancer surgery
Lung capacity after lung cancer
The size of secondary lymphedema after breast cancer?
Question 3
What does the abbreviation CIPN in the article stand for?
Cancer induced peripheral numbness
Chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy
Cancer induced peripheral neuroma
Chemotherapy induced partial neuralgia
Cancer induced partial neuralgia
Question 4
According to the article, which subject is hampered by insufficient data/evidence for the effectiveness of sport and exercise therapy?
Sexual dysfunction in urological and gynecological tumors
Anxiety and depression after lung cancer
Shoulder pain after mastectomy
Cardiotoxic adverse effects of therapy in breast cancer
Breast cancer associated lymphedema
Question 5
At what level should the intensity of training—measures using the Borg Scale—be set for cancer patients?
5–6 (not strenuous at all)
8–10 (very easy to easy)
12–14 (somewhat strenuous)
15–17 (strenuous to very strenuous)
19–20 (extremely difficult up to greatest possible effort)
Question 6
The content of exercise therapy should be guided by the so called FITT criteria. What does the acronym FITT stand for?
Fatigue, impairment, time, therapy
Force, impact, training, timing
Frequency, intensity, time, type
Fierce, immediate, training, together
Forever, individualized, training, time
Question 7
According to the article, for which cancers did many studies find a particularly good effectiveness for exercise therapy as regards the reduction of fatigue?
Breast and prostate cancer
Lung and pancreatic cancer
Liver and kidney cancer
Bowel and skin cancer
Lymph gland and bladder cancer
Question 8
Which time period is given as a benchmark for a break in vigorous exercise training after cardiotoxic therapy?
12 h
24 h
48 h
4 days
7 days
Question 9
For which of the named areas does the article mention for the included studies explicitly that the effects of exercise treatment seems to be much bigger in women than in men?
Physical functioning
Depression
Cognitive functions
Bone health
Urinary incontinence
Question 10
The article mentions measures that were able to increase adherence in exercise studies by up to 80%. Which of the following measures is not among those?
Home based training
Shared decision making in therapeutic planning
Individual and supervised exercise therapy
Regular mandatory appointments to adjust/adapt therapy
Education delivered by medical staff regarding physical activity
Acknowledgments
Translated from the original German by Birte Twisselmann, PhD.
Footnotes
Conflict of interest statement
FTB is a board member of the Deutscher Verband für Gesundheitssport und Sporttherapie (DVGS, the German association for health sports and exercise therapy).
ABE received honoraria for continuing medical education events for exercise instructors in the subject of sport and cancer from the Behinderten- und Rehabilitationsverband Bayern (BVS, the Bavarian disabled and rehabilitation sports association, reg. assoc.).
The remaining authors declare that no conflict of interest exists.
References
- 1.Robert Koch-Institut; Robert Koch-Institut, editors; die Gesellschaft der epidemiologischen Krebsregister in Deutschland e. V., editors 13th edition. Berlin: 2021. Krebs in Deutschland für 2017/2018. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Allemani C, Matsuda T, Di Carlo V, et al. Global surveillance of trends in cancer survival 2000-14 (CONCORD-3): analysis of individual records for 37 513 025 patients diagnosed with one of 18 cancers from 322 population-based registries in 71 countries. Lancet. 2018;391:1023–1075. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)33326-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Shi Q, Smith TG, Michonski JD, Stein KD, Kaw C, Cleeland CS. Symptom burden in cancer survivors 1 year after diagnosis: a report from the American Cancer Society‘s Studies of Cancer Survivors. Cancer. 2011;117:2779–2790. doi: 10.1002/cncr.26146. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Hojman P, Gehl J, Christensen JF, Pedersen BK. Molecular mechanisms linking exercise to cancer prevention and treatment. Cell Metab. 2018;27:10–21. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2017.09.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Schmitz KH, Campbell AM, Stuiver MM, et al. Exercise is medicine in oncology: engaging clinicians to help patients move through cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69:468–484. doi: 10.3322/caac.21579. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Weggemans RM, Backx FJG, Borghouts L, et al. The 2017 Dutch Physical Activity Guidelines. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2018;15 doi: 10.1186/s12966-018-0661-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Singh B, Spence R, Steele ML, Hayes S, Toohey K. Exercise for individuals with lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events, feasibility, and effectiveness. Semin Oncol Nurs. 2020;36 doi: 10.1016/j.soncn.2020.151076. 151076. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Belloni S, Arrigoni C, Caruso R. Effects from physical exercise on reduced cancer-related fatigue: a systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Acta Oncol. 2021;60:1678–1687. doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2021.1962543. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Aune D, Markozannes G, Abar L, et al. Physical activity and health-related quality of life in women with breast cancer: a meta-analysis. JNCI Cancer Spectrum. 2022;6 doi: 10.1093/jncics/pkac072. pkac072. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Hasenoehrl T, Palma S, Ramazanova D, et al. Resistance exercise and breast cancer-related lymphedema—a systematic review update and meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28:3593–3603. doi: 10.1007/s00520-020-05521-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Andersen HH, Vinther A, Lund CM, et al. Effectiveness of different types, delivery modes and extensiveness of exercise in patients with breast cancer receiving systemic treatment—a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2022;178 doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103802. 103802. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Baumann FT, Reimer N, Gockeln T, et al. Supervised pelvic floor muscle exercise is more effective than unsupervised pelvic floor muscle exercise at improving urinary incontinence in prostate cancer patients following radical prostatectomy—a systematic review and meta-analysis. Disabil Rehabil. 2021;44:5374–5385. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2021.1937717. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Kannan P, Lam HY, Ma TK, Lo CN, Mui TY, Tang WY. Efficacy of physical therapy interventions on quality of life and upper quadrant pain severity in women with post-mastectomy pain syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Qual Life Res. 2022;31:951–973. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-02926-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Yang H, Yang Z, Pan H, Zhou Q. Effects of physical activity on sleep problems in breast cancer survivors: a meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer. 2021;29:4023–4032. doi: 10.1007/s00520-020-05914-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Fang YY, Lee YH, Chan JC, et al. Effects of exercise interventions on social and cognitive functioning of men with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28:2043–2057. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-05278-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Ma ZY, Yao SS, Shi YY, Lu NN, Cheng F. Effect of aerobic exercise on cardiotoxic outcomes in women with breast cancer undergoing anthracycline or trastuzumab treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer. 2022;30:10323–10334. doi: 10.1007/s00520-022-07368-w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Rose GL, Skinner TL, Keating SE, Friedrich NK, Bolam KA. The effects of exercise on the bone health of people with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int. 2022;33:327–338. doi: 10.1007/s00198-021-06131-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Saarto T, Sievänen H, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen P, et al. Effect of supervised and home exercise training on bone mineral density among breast cancer patients. A 12-month randomised controlled trial. Osteoporos Int. 2012;23:1601–1612. doi: 10.1007/s00198-011-1761-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Guo S, Han W, Wang P, Wang X, Fang X. Effects of exercise on chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cancer Surviv. 2023;17:318–331. doi: 10.1007/s11764-022-01182-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Nakano J, Hashizume K, Fukushima T, et al. Effects of aerobic and resistance exercises on physical symptoms in cancer patients: a meta-analysis. Integr Cancer Ther. 2018;17:1048–1058. doi: 10.1177/1534735418807555. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Chen L, Peng P, Xu Z, Ding X. The effects of exercise on the quality of life of patients with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on the QLQ-C30 quality of life scale. Gland Surg. 2023;12:633–650. doi: 10.21037/gs-23-126. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Barcellini A, Dominoni M, Dal Mas F, et al. Sexual health dysfunction after radiotherapy for gynecological cancer: role of physical rehabilitation including pelvic floor muscle training. Front Med. 2021;8 doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.813352. 813352. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Williams AD, Bird ML, Hardcastle SG, Kirschbaum M, Ogden KJ, Walters JA. Exercise for reducing falls in people living with and beyond cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;10 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011687.pub2. Cd011687. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Campbell KL, Winters-Stone KM, Wiskemann J, et al. Exercise Guidelines for Cancer Survivors: consensus statement from international multidisciplinary roundtable. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2019 51:2375–2390. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002116. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie, AWMF. DKDK: Interdisziplinäre S3-Leitlinie für die Früherkennung, Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge des Mammakarzinoms. AWMF Registernummer: 032-045OL2018. [Google Scholar]
- 26.Bull FC, Al-Ansari SS, Biddle S, et al. World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Br J Sports Med. 2020;54:1451–1462. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2020-102955. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Baumann FT, Schüle K. Köln: Deutscher Ärzteverlag; 2022. Bewegungstherapie in der Onkologie. [Google Scholar]
- 28.Kampshoff CS, Stacey F, Short CE, et al. Demographic, clinical, psychosocial, and environmental correlates of objectively assessed physical activity among breast cancer survivors. Support Care Cancer. 2016;24:3333–3342. doi: 10.1007/s00520-016-3148-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Leach HJ, Marker RJ, Scorsone JJ, Peters JC, Purcell WT. Predictors of attendance during an exercise program for cancer survivors. Support Care Cancer. 2021;29:3425–3428. doi: 10.1007/s00520-021-06057-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Baumann FT, Hallek M, Meyer J, Galvão DA, Bloch W, Elter T. Onkologische Trainings- und Bewegungstherapie (OTT). Ein personalisiertes Behandlungskonzept für Krebspatienten. 2015;140:1457–1461. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-104465. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Wang XS, Zhao F, Fisch MJ, et al. Prevalence and characteristics of moderate to severe fatigue: a multicenter study in cancer patients and survivors. Cancer. 2014;120:425–432. doi: 10.1002/cncr.28434. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Lahart IM, Metsios GS, Nevill AM, Carmichael AR. Physical activity for women with breast cancer after adjuvant therapy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;1 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011292.pub2. Cd011292. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Liu L, Ancoli-Israel S. Sleep disturbances in cancer. Psychiatr Ann. 2008;38:627–634. doi: 10.3928/00485713-20080901-01. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Erdmann F KP, Grabow D, Spix C. Mainz: Institute of Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics (IMBEI) at the University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University; 2020. German childhood cancer registry—annual report 2019 (1980-2018) [Google Scholar]
- 35.Stanulla M, Erdmann F, Kratz CP. Risikofaktoren für Krebserkrankungen im Kindes- und Jugendalter. Monatsschrift Kinderheilkunde. 2021;169:30–38. [Google Scholar]
- 36.Wiskemann J, Baumann F. Update: S3-Leitline Bewegungstherapie bei onkologischen Erkrankungen. Forum (Genova) 2022;37:449–451. [Google Scholar]