Segal 2003.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: RCT Number randomized: 155; 82 to the exercise group and 73 to the control group Study start and stop dates: September 1999 to August 2001 Length of intervention: 12 weeks Length of follow‐up: to end of the intervention
Participants	Type cancer: prostate cancer Stage, n (%): exercise group: Stage I, 0 (0%); Stage II, 40 (48.8%); Stage III, 11 (13.4%); Stage IV, 17 (20.7%); unassignable, 14 (17.1%) control group: Stage I, 0 (0%); Stage II, 35 (47.9%); Stage III, 13 (18.1%); Stage IV, 10 (13.9%); unassignable, 15 (20.8%) Time since cancer diagnosis, mean (SD) days: exercise group: 980.1 (1115.4) days control group: 762.9 (1292.6) days Time in active treatment: "scheduled to receive androgen deprivation therapy" Inclusion criteria: histologically documented prostate cancer scheduled to receive androgen deprivation therapy for at least 3 months after recruitment treating oncologist provided consent Eligibility criteria related to interest or ability, or both, to exercise: none Exclusion criteria: severe cardiac disease (NYHA class III or greater) uncontrolled hypertension (blood pressure > 160/95 mmHg) uncontrolled pain unstable bone lesions residence > 1 hour from the study center Gender: male Current age, mean (SD) years exercise group: 68.2 (7.9) years control group: 67.7 (7.5) years Age at cancer diagnosis: not reported Ethnicity/race: not reported Education level: not reported SES: not reported Employment status: not reported Comorbidities: not reported Past exercise history; prior activity level, n (%): exercise group: < twice per week, 31 (37.8%); ≥ 3 times per week, 51 (62.2%); prior resistance training at < twice per week, 64 (78.0%); ≥ 3 times per week, 16 (22.0%) control group: < twice per week, 26 (35.6%); ≥ 3 times per week, 47 (64.4%); prior resistance training at < twice per week, 56 (76.7%); ≥ 3 times per week, 17 (23.3%) On hormone therapy: not reported
Interventions	82 participants assigned to the exercise intervention, including: personalized resistance exercise program  consisting of  a standardized series of warm‐up and cool‐down exercises to be performed under supervision with 2 sets of 8 to 12 repetitions of the following 9 exercises were  performed: leg extension, calf raises, leg curl, chest press, latissimus pull‐down, overhead press, triceps extension, biceps curls, and modified curl‐ups Type exercise (aerobic/anaerobic): anaerobic Intensity of the experimental exercise intervention: at 60% to 70% of 1‐repetition maximum, increasing resistance by 5 lb when > 12 repetitions Frequency: 3 times per week Duration of individual sessions: as needed to complete program Duration of exercise program: 12 weeks Total number of exercise sessions: 36 sessions Format: individual Facility: fitness center Professionally led by a certified fitness consultant Adherence: attendance averaged 79% (28 of 36 sessions) 73 participants assigned to control group, including: waiting list Contamination of control group: not reported
Outcomes	Primary outcomes included: fatigue, assessed using the FACT‐F global HRQoL, assessed using the FACT‐P Other outcomes included: muscular fitness, assessed using a standard load test body composition, including BMI, weight, waist circumference, subcutaneous skin‐folds Outcomes were measured at baseline and end of the intervention: exercise group: n = 82 at baseline, n = 74 at postintervention control group: n = 73 at baseline, n = 61 at postintervention Subgroup analysis: curative versus palliative treatment goal receiving androgen deprivation therapy for < 1 year versus longer Adverse events: none reported
Notes	Country: Canada Funding: NCIC. CCS; Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada; Canadian Institutes of Health Research CCS/NCIC Sociobehavioral Cancer Research Network.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Table of random numbers
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	"The treatment allocation was concealed from the study coordinator until completion of baseline testing and stratification"
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Owing to the nature of the intervention, it was not possible to conceal allocation to the intervention from the participants
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Study personnel and outcome assessors for the HRQoL outcomes were not masked or blinded to the study interventions. However, blinding was used for physical outcomes "A research assistant with no knowledge of group assignment collected muscular fitness and anthropometric data and scored questionnaire responses"
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	8 men in the exercise group and 12 in the control group withdrew
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