Table 3.
Between group efficacy outcomes
| Outcomes | Group-supervised versus PT | Home-based versus PT | Non-inferiority margin | Probability of inferiority of Group-supervised to PTa | Probability of inferiority of Home-based to PTa |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quality of Life and Fatigue | |||||
| FACT-G | −1.7 (−8.7 to 5.4) | −2.9 (−9.7 to 3.8) | 4 points | 25.6% | 37.9% |
| FACT-F | 1.5 (−3.9 to 6.6) | −0.5 (−5.9 to 4.8) | 3 points | 4.9% | 17.6% |
| FACT-P | −1.4 (−5.4 to 2.6) | −4.3 (− 8.1 to −0.5) | 3 points | 20.9% | 74.4% |
| Physical Fitness | |||||
| VO2 peak | − 0.7 (− 3.2 to 1.8) | − 1.8 (−4.2 to 0.6) | 2.5 mL/kg/min | 8.2% | 26.7% |
| Grip strength | −0.3 (− 3.3 to 2.7) | − 3.4 (−6.3 to − 0.6) | 4.5 kg | 0.2% | 23.3% |
| Sit-to-stand | 0.7 (− 4.3 to 5.5) | 1.4 (− 3.3 to 5.9) | 4 repetitions | 3.1% | 1.1% |
Note: The above values are mean differences between baseline and 6 months with 95% confidence intervals in parentheses. The reference group is the personal training arm
FACT Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (G general, F fatigue subscale, P prostate); PT personal training
aThe Bayesian posterior probability of inferiority is calculated as the probability that the mean outcome in the comparator arm is lower than that in the personal training arm by at least the specified non-inferiority margin. See text for more details