Dodd 2010.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: RCT Number randomized: 119; 44 to an exercise group that began exercise during treatment (EE), 36 to an exercise group that began exercise after treatment (CE), and 39 to the control group Study start and stop dates: 1999 to 2005 Length of intervention: 4 to 6 months Length of follow‐up: 1 year from baseline
Participants	Type cancer: breast, n = 112; ovarian, n = 6; colon, n = 1 Cancer stage, n (%): EE group: Stage I, 13 (32.5%); Stage II, 19 (47.5%); Stage III, 8 (20.0%) CE group: Stage I, 12 (35.3%); Stage II, 18 (52.9%); Stage III, 4 (11.8%) control group: Stage I, 15 (40.5%); Stage II, 15 (40.5%); Stage III, 7 (18.9%) Time since cancer diagnosis: not reported Time beyond active treatment: unclear  Inclusion criteria: women ≥ 18 years old confirmed diagnosis of breast, colorectal, or ovarian cancer able to read, write, and understand English willing and able to provide written informed consent KPS score of ≥ 60 Eligibility criterion related to interest or ability to exercise, or both: absolute contraindications to exercise testing as established by the ACSM Exclusion criteria: concurrent radiation therapy or bone marrow transplantation uncontrolled hypertension or diabetes mellitus pain intensity score of > 3 on a 0‐ to 10‐point numeric rating scale lytic bone lesion or orthopedic limitations history of major depression or sleep disorders diagnosis of AIDS‐related malignancy or leukemia Gender: women Current age, mean (SD) years: EE group: 49.4 (8.2) years CE group: 50.4 (9.0) years control group: 52.0 (10.8) years Age at cancer diagnosis: not reported Ethnicity/race, n (%): EE group: white, 30 (68.2%); black, 4 (9.1%); Asian, 7 (15.9%); other, 3 (6.8%) CE group: white, 27 (79.4%); black, 3 (8.8%); Asian, 3 (8.8%); other, 1 (2.9%) control group: white, 31 (79.5%); black, 5 (12.8%); Asian, 2 (5.1%); other, 1 (2.6%) Education level: not reported SES, ≥ USD40,000, n (%): EE group: 35 (83.3%) CE group: 30 (90.9%) control group: 29 (76.3%) Employment status, employed full or part time, n (%): EE group: 17 (41.5%) CE group: 19 (57.6%) control group: 14 (36.0%) Comorbidities: not reported Past exercise history, participation in regular exercise, n (%): EE group: 29 (67.4%) CE group: 24 (70.6%) control group: 22 (56.4%) On hormone therapy: not reported
Interventions	80 participants assigned to the exercise intervention (44 in EE group and 36 in CE group), including: individualized program adjusted to participant's fitness level and adjusted weekly to maintain the exercise prescription. The program consisted of a cardiovascular/aerobic exercise (e.g. walking, jogging, or cycling) Type exercise (aerobic/anaerobic): aerobic Intensity of experimental exercise intervention: targeted to HR corresponding to 60% to 80% VO2 peak, and to achieve the Borg Scale of 12‐ to 14‐point level ("somewhat hard"). Frequency: 3 to 5 times per week Duration of individual sessions: 20 to 30 minutes of continuous exercise Duration of exercise program: 4 to 6 months Total number of exercise sessions: not reported, but varied Format: individual Facility: home based Professionally supervised by exercise physiologist 39 participants assigned to control group, including: usual care Adherence: the EE group reported an adherence rate of 73% at end of intervention and 75.7% at end of follow‐up, and the CE group reported 86.7% adherence at end of intervention Contamination of control group: not reported
Outcomes	No primary outcome was identified. QoL outcomes included: fatigue, measured by the Revised Piper Fatigue Scale sleep dysfunction, measured by the General Sleep Disturbance Scale depression, measured by the CES‐D pain, measured by the Worst Pain Intensity Scale Physical performance was measured using the KPS scale Outcomes were measured at baseline, 4 to 6 months (end of intervention) and 1 year: EE group: n = 44 at baseline, n = 39 at 4 to 6 months, n = 39 at 1 year CE group: n = 36 at baseline, n = 35 at 4 to 6 months, n = 35 at end of 1 year control group: n = 39 at baseline, n = 38 at 4 to 6 months, n = 38 at 1 year Analyses were completed on 37 women in the EE group, 32 women in the CE group, and 37 women in the control group Subgroup analysis: none reported Adverse events: EE and CE groups: hip pain, sciatica (n = 16), arm discomfort (n = 4), knee discomfort (n = 10), ankle discomfort (n = 3), and foot discomfort (n = 8) asymptomatic ischemic electrocardiogram changes (i.e. ST‐segment depression, n = 10), asymptomatic bigeminy (n = 6), and premature ventricular complexes (n = 9). Abnormal findings were sent and reviewed by participant's primary physician, oncologist, cardiologist, or a combination and 8 participants were discontinued from the study
Notes	Country: US Funding: National Cancer Institute; Clinical & Translational Science Institute, Clinical Research Center
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	The generation of the random sequence was not described
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Whether the treatment assignment was concealed from study personnel and participants was not described
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Owing to the nature of the intervention, it was not possible to blind the participants; however, it is unclear whether the outcome was influenced by a lack of masking
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Study personnel and outcome assessors were not masked or blinded to the study interventions
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	Several participants in each of the study groups were excluded from the analyses. There was no ITT analysis and it is unclear how missing data were handled
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	There appears to be no selective reporting of outcomes
Other bias	Low risk	The trial appears to be free of other problems that could put it at a high risk of bias