Milne 2008a.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: cross‐over RCT. Only information for first period included here Number randomized: 58; 29 to the immediate exercise group and 29 to the delayed exercise control group Study start and stop dates: recruitment between January 2005 and March 2005 Length of intervention: 12 weeks Length of follow‐up: to end of the intervention
Participants	Type cancer: breast cancer Cancer stage, n (%): exercise group: Stage I, 6 (20.7%); Stage IIa, 14 (48.3%); Stage IIb, 9 (31.0%); Stage IIIa, 0 (0%) control group: Stage I, 9 (31.0%); Stage IIa, 11 (37.9%); Stage IIb, 7 (24.1%); Stage IIIa, 2 (6.9%) Time since cancer diagnosis: within 24 months Time beyond active treatment, mean (SD) months: exercise group: 12.6 (4.62) months control group: 13.4 (3.4) months Inclusion criteria: ≥18 years old English speaking Stage I to II breast cancer within 24 months of cancer diagnosis completion of all treatment except hormone therapy Eligibility criterion related to interest or ability to exercise, or both. Participants were excluded if: previous engagement in a formal exercise programs for 6 months prior to participation in the study failed the rPAR‐Q Exclusion criteria:  evidence of recurrent disease Gender: female Current age, mean (SD) years: exercise group: 55.2 (8.4) years control group: 55.1 (8.0) years Age at cancer diagnosis: not reported Ethnicity/race: not reported Education level, university education, n (%): exercise group: had university education, 11 (37.9%) control group: had university education, 15 (51.7%) SES: not reported Employment status, part‐ or full‐time employment, n (%): exercise group: 16 (55.2%) control group: 16 (55.2%) Comorbidities: not reported Past exercise history: not reported On hormone therapy: 74.1% on hormone therapy
Interventions	29 participants assigned to the immediate exercise group, including: combined aerobic (cycle and rowing ergometers, mini‐trampoline, and step‐up blocks) resistance training (12 different exercises, including chest press, chest extension, biceps curls, triceps extension, leg extension, leg curls, hip abduction and adduction, back extension, abdominal crunches, standing flys, and leg press) stretching Type exercise (aerobic/anaerobic): aerobic Intensity of experimental exercise intervention: aerobic: the cardiovascular component was conducted for 20 minutes and ended with a 5‐minute cool‐down period resistance: for each exercise, participants performed 2 sets of 10 to 15 repetitions of light weights and progressed to a heavier weight once the current weight and repetitions could be achieved and with good form stretching: 5 minutes of stretching at the beginning and end of each session Frequency: 3 times per week Duration of sessions: 1 hour Duration of program: 12 weeks Total number of exercise sessions: 36 Format: individual and group Facility: Health and Rehabilitation Program Clinic at The University of Western Australia Professionally led: supervised by exercise physiologists Adherence: average attendance was 60.4% (21.7 of 36 sessions) with a median of 23 (63.9%) and a range of 11 to 36 29 participants assigned to the control group, including: delayed exercise group, asked not participate in exercise during weeks 1 to 12 telephone calls at weeks 3, 6, 9, and 12 weeks Contamination of control group: not reported
Outcomes	Primary outcome: QoL outcomes, including: QoL measured using FACT‐B scale. Scale description and score range not provided Secondary outcomes, included: fatigue, measured using the SCFC. Description and score range not provided Social Physique Anxiety, measured using the SPAS‐7 physical fitness, assessed by SFT Outcomes were measured at baseline, and weeks 6, 12, 18, and 24, except for SFT, which was measured at baseline and 12 weeks only: exercise group: n = 29 at baseline, n = 29 at 6 weeks, n = 29 at 12 weeks, n = 28 at 18 weeks, n = 28 at 24 weeks control group: n = 29 at baseline, n = 29 at 6 weeks, n = 29 at 12 weeks, n = 28 at 18 weeks, n = 28 at 24 weeks Adverse events: none reported
Notes	Country: Australia Funding: CCS and the NCIC/CCS Sociobehavioral Cancer Research Network
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Computer‐generated randomization
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	"Group assignments were concealed from the project director who recruited participants to the trial"
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	Low risk	All study participants completed week 12 assessments and were included in the analysis
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	There appears to be no selective reporting of outcomes
Other bias	High risk	Low adherence