Skip to content

Advertisement

You're viewing the new version of our site. Please leave us feedback.

Learn more

European Review of Aging and Physical Activity

Open Access

A 1,408 km bicycle tour with prostate cancer patients—results of a pilot study

  • Freerk T. Baumann1Email author,
  • Eva M. Zopf1,
  • Tanja Westhof1,
  • Stefanie Krohe1,
  • Alexandra Stempin1,
  • Matthias Müsgens1,
  • Anne Krause1,
  • Philipp Zimmer1,
  • Julia Beulertz1,
  • Wilhelm Bloch1 and
  • Elke Jäger2
European Review of Aging and Physical Activity201310:119

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11556-012-0119-z

Received: 14 December 2012

Accepted: 23 December 2012

Published: 12 January 2013

Abstract

Negative psychological and physical effects of prostate cancer and its medical treatment may persist many years after diagnosis. The influence of a long cycling tour on rehabilitative or health-related effects with prostate cancer patients has not yet been studied. In practice, physicians and therapists rarely recommend cycling to prostate cancer. In May 2010, eight prostate cancer patients rode their bikes for over 1,408 km from Cologne to Marseille within 5 weeks. Endurance test, blood examinations (prostate-specific antigen (PSA), total testosterone, interleukin-6, oxidative stress, and antioxidant capacity) and quality of life questionnaires were completed before and after the tour. All eight subjects reached Marseille. Significant improvements could be observed in physical performance and certain quality of life scores (p = 0.008), as well as a reduction of total testosterone (p = 0.19). PSA levels did not change. This pilot study suggests that long bicycle tours with prostate cancer patients are feasible. Due to the missing control group and the small sample size, the results of this pilot study are limited.

Keywords

Prostate cancerBicyclePSAExercisePhysical activityTestosterone

Introduction

Every year, 60,120 men are diagnosed with prostate cancer, making it the most common malignant neoplasia in men in Germany [25]. Prostate cancer and its medical treatment cause a number of adverse effects on physical, psychological, and social level. Eighteen months after radical prostatectomy, 17–34 % of the men suffer from urinary incontinence and up to 60 % experience erectile dysfunction [33]. Hormone treatment can cause depressive moods, hot flushes, impotence, blood loss, diarrhea, and an increased body fat percentage [11, 13, 34, 36]. Additionally, muscular strength and bone density are reduced during and after androgen-deprivation therapy [32]. Investigations have shown that the risk of developing a metabolic syndrome, diabetes mellitus, or cardiovascular disease increases during a long-term hormone treatment [27, 34]. Also psychological impacts, anxiety, sadness, and depressive syndromes are often observed during medical treatment [8, 17]. Incontinence and impotence make patients feel uncomfortable and ashamed and their self-esteem may be weakened [8, 17]. Psychological stress frequently causes sleep disturbances, fatigue, nausea, and pain and negatively influences social skills [19] and quality of life [17, 19, 37]. The resulting risk is that patients underestimate their own performance due to insecurity and therefore become physically inactive. This may then lead to inactivity-induced health problems or even diseases (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1

Model describing the influence of cancer diagnosis on self-confidence and physical activity level

In the last few years, several studies have shown that physical activities are feasible and effective for prostate cancer patients; not only during rehabilitation and in the aftercare but also during the medical treatment [4]. Resistance and aerobic exercise reduce fatigue and improve quality of life, muscular strength, and cardiovascular fitness during irradiation [18, 31, 36, 39]. Positive influences on muscular fitness, physical performance, fatigue, and quality of life have also been observed in patients undergoing hormone treatment [5, 30]. Particularly, pelvic floor exercises improve incontinence in affected men [15, 20]. Finally, latest research suggests that the mortality risk is reduced in physically active prostate cancer survivors [9]. Even though the underlying effects are still unclear, an increased interleukin-6 (IL-6) release [21] as well as a decreased oxidative stress level is discussed [3]. The relevancy of the sexual hormone testosterone is mostly unknown [26]. However, there are references that physical activity may influence total testosterone [14] as well as oxidative stress levels [12] and interleukin-6 [21].

Even though cycling is a very popular sport in our society, no studies could be found that examine the feasibility of a bicycle tour which lasts for several weeks and involves prostate cancer patients. This may be the reason why cycling can hardly be found in physical exercise guidelines for prostate cancer patients [28]. In practice, physicians and therapists rarely recommend cycling to prostate cancer patients due to insecurity, fear, and/or ignorance. Within this pilot project, we evaluated the feasibility of a bicycle tour with prostate cancer patients which lasted several weeks and comprised 1,408 km.

Methods

Patient recruitment was conducted by a Federal Association for Prostate Cancer Support (Bundesverband Prostatakrebs Selbsthilfe). Inclusion criteria comprised diagnosed prostate cancer, good German language skills, and a written consent regarding participation in the study. Exclusion criteria were serious cardiac disease (New York Heart Association Class III–IV), severe orthopedic or internal disease that does not allow a bicycle tour, pronounced oncological progress within the last 12 months, brain and/or bone metastases, immunosuppression, and/or acute health, and somatic restrictions (e.g., infection, fever). A sports medical examination (e.g., anamnesis, electrocardiogram, etc.), which was conducted 3 months prior to the tour was meant to confirm safety. The protocol was approved by the ethics committee of the German Sport University Cologne and all procedures are in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975. All patients provided written informed consent prior to participation.

Subjects

A total of 10 subjects were recruited. Two subjects had to be excluded prior to the start of the tour due to orthopedic complaints and an acute sport injury. Therefore, eight prostate cancer patients participated in the bicycle tour. The mean age of the patients was 66.87 years, the mean body size was 180.37 cm, and the mean body weight was 88.0 kg (Table 1). One participant dropped out during the follow-up period (t4) without giving a reason.
Table 1

Subjects and anthropometric data

Subject

Age

Weight (kg)

Height (cm)

BMI (kg/m2)

Diagnosis

1

67

86

182

25.96

Prostate cancer; p T2c; G2; Gleasen score, 3 + 3 = 6

2

67

95

185

27.76

Adenocarcinoma of the prostate pT3b; pN0 (0/23); cM0; G3; Gleason score, 4 + 4 = 8

3

69

93

173

31.07

Prostate cancer pT2c; pN0; pR1; G2; Gleason score, 3 + 3 = 6

4

66

80

185

23.37

Prostate cancer T2c; pN0; Gleason score, 3 + 4 = 7

5

66

82

176

26.47

Prostate cancer pT3b; pN0 (0/6); R0; G2b; Gleason score, 4 + 3 = 7

6

66

87

182

26.26

Adenocarcinoma of the prostate pT2b; pN0 (0/3); pMX; pL0; pV0; pR0; Gleason score, 3 + 4 = 7

7

65

87

178

27.46

Prostate cancer T2c; N0; M0; G3; Gleason score, 5 + 5 = 10

8

69

94

182

28.38

Prostate cancer G2a; Gleason score, 3 + 3 = 6

Assessments

Assessments were conducted 3 months before (t1), 1 week before (t2), 1 week after (t3), and 6 months after (t4) the bicycle tour. In order to assess aerobic endurance, a spirometry on a cycle ergometer was conducted (VO2max, lactate, and respiratory quotient). The initial watt load of 60 W was increased every 5 min by 30 W with a 1-min break between each level. Spiroergometry is considered as the assessment method with the highest validity [7].

Patients completed two quality of life questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and PR25, version 3), which were developed by “the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer ”(EORTC). The general questionnaire consists of 30 items, which result in five functional scales (physical, cognitive, role, social, and emotional functioning), three symptom scales (fatigue, nausea/vomiting, and pain), a global scale concerning health-related quality of life, and six single items (dyspnoe, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, and financial difficulties). The prostate cancer-specific module EORTC QLQ-PR25 contains 25 items. Its subscales include three symptom scales (urinary, bowel, and treatment-related symptoms), as well as a sexual function scale [1]. Furthermore, the following blood parameters were analyzed in a central laboratory: prostate-specific antigen (PSA), total testosterone, and interleukin-6. For organizational reasons, blood samples were only taken at t2, t3, and t4. Oxidative stress levels and antioxidant capacities were examined by measuring the concentration of free oxygen radicals (reactive oxygen species) and the antioxidant capacity (antioxidants, antioxidant capacity) in patients’ capillary blood (Fort and Ford Test, Company Incomat, Glashütten, Germany) [12].

The intervention

Eight prostate cancer patients took part in a 1,408 km bicycles tour from the west of Germany to the south of France. The tour started in May 2010 in Cologne and went through Germany, Luxembourg, and France, all the way to Marseille. The patients were accompanied by three students. Two joined the patients on their bicycles, while one drove the support car carrying luggage, food, and service materials. The distances covered within the 21 daily stages ranged between 34 and 120 km per day (Ø 67 km). On average, participants rode their bikes for 4.35 h per day. In order to assess energy expenditure and physical activity levels, four patients wore a Sense Wear armband (SMT medical GmbH&Co Würzburg, Germany) during the entire bicycle tour. Sense Wear is a metabolic activity and lifestyle monitor, which determines caloric expenditure [10]. The total time of travel added up to approximately 91.50 h and a mean total energy expenditure of 95,974 kcal per person was reached. The group took three rest days during their tour.

Statistics

Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS German version 20.0 (IBM). In order to analyze the study data, the median, standard deviation, and an analysis of variance was applied. A one-factorial analysis of variance for repeated measurements, including the Bonferroni post hoc test, was employed. For graphical processing and representation of the study data, the spreadsheet program Microsoft Office Excel 2007 was used.

Results

All eight subjects reached Marseille within 5 weeks. Patients were able to improve all aerobic endurance parameters throughout the tour. Lactate concentrations even showed a (highly) significant development in the preparation phase from t1 to t2 measurement (Fig. 2). There was no change from t2 to t3 but a slight decrease of lactate concentration to t4.
Fig. 2

Changes in lactate concentrations from t1 (n = 8, SA ± 0.84), t2 (n = 8, SA ± 0.64), t3 (n = 8, SA ± 0.47) and t4 (n = 7, SA ± 0.79), ANOVA, (standard deviation (SD), sample size (n), significance value (p), significant (*), highly significant (**), not significant (n.s.) for all p > 0.05), t1, t2, t3, and t4

Overall, the subjective parameters of quality of life showed positive changes within this pilot study, even though these rarely reached statistical significance. More noticeable, changes were achieved in the prostate cancer-specific module PR25. Clear improvements could be observed, including a highly significant (p = 0.008) effect on treatment-related quality of life (Table 2).
Table 2

Changes in quality of life from t1 (n = 8) to t2 (n = 8), t3 (n = 8) and t4 (n = 7), ANOVA (standard deviation (±SD), sample size (n), significance value (p), significant (*), highly significant (**), not significant (n.s.) for all p > 0.05) t1, t2, t3, and t4

 

T1

T2

T3

T4

p

EORTC QLQC-30

Quality of life

73.81 ± 8.91

73.81 ± 10.12

82.14 ± 19.50

73.81 ± 13.11

0.447

Physical functioning

98.09 ± 3.25

93.33 ± 5.44

98.10 ± 5.04

95.24 ± 9.97

0.139

Role functioning

95.24 ± 12.60

95.24 ± 12.60

95.24 ± 12.60

88.10 ± 15.85

0.415

Cognitive functioning

80.95 ± 24.40

76.19 ± 28.64

80.95 ± 17.82

90.48 ± 18.90

0.98

Social functioning

85.71 ± 17.82

88.10 ± 15.85

92.86 ± 13.11

83.33 ± 16.67

0.321

Emotional functioning

84.52 ± 18.28

75.00 ± 25.00

90.48 ± 13.11

79.76 ± 24.93

0.097

Fatigue

15.87 ± 24.73

17.46 ± 23.00

9.52 ± 13.50

9.52 ± 13.50

0.246

Nausea/vomiting

0 ± 0

0 ± 0

0 ± 0

0 ± 0

k.A.

Pain

14.29 ± 20.25

4.76 ± 8.13

11.90 ± 20.89

19.05 ± 26.23

0.488

Dyspnea

9.52 ± 25.20

14.29 ± 37.80

0 ± 0

9.52 ± 25.20

0.721

Insomnia

23.81 ± 31.71

33.33 ± 27.22

23.81 ± 25.20

23.81 ± 31.71

0.825

Appetite loss

0 ± 0

0 ± 0

4.76 ± 12.60

0 ± 0

0.415

Constipation

4.76 ± 12.60

4.76 ± 12.60

4.76 ± 12.60

0 ± 0

0.415

Diarrhea

4.76 ± 12.60

4.76 ± 12.60

4.76 ± 12.60

0 ± 0

0.761

Financial difficulties

0 ± 0

0 ± 0

0 ± 0

4.76 ± 12.60

0.415

EORTC PR 25

Sexual functioning

59.52 ± 15.95

61.90 ± 22.55

54.76 ± 22.78

61.90 ± 32.62

0.73

Urinary symptoms

22.88 ± 25.32

25.33 ± 25.95

22.29 ± 23.29

27.38 ± 25.06

0.07

Bowel symptoms

3.57 ± 4.45

2.38 ± 4.06

2.38 ± 4.06

4.76 ± 6.56

0.66

Treatment-related symptoms

19.84 ± 13.90

11.91 ± 16.17

8.41 ± 12.03

13.33 ± 14.55

0.008** (t1–t3: 0.006**)

Regarding blood examinations, PSA concentrations did not change in any subject throughout the bicycle tour and therefore maintained stable. Interleukin-6 concentrations remained constant from the first to the second measurement; however, it increased 6 months after the intervention. Total testosterone concentrations decreased clearly yet not significantly (p = 0.19). Values remained in the normal range (Table 3).
Table 3

Changes in PSA, total testosterone, and interleukin-6 from t2 (n = 8) to t3 (n = 8) and t4 (n = 7), ANOVA, (standard deviation (±SD), sample size (n), significance value (p), for all p > 0.05), t2, t3, and t4

Parameter

t2

t3

t4

p value

Total testosterone

4.32 ± 2.29

3.96 ± 2.2

3.51 ± 1.73

0.19

PSA

0.11 ± 0.13

0.11 ± 0.13

0.15 ± 0.25

0.48

Interleukin-6

2.2 ± 0.46

2.225 ± 0.6

2.8 ± 1.44

0.11

n

 

8

8

7

In terms of free radical determination, oxidative stress levels remained nearly constant throughout the intervention. Half a year after the bicycle tour, a nonsignificant decrease could be observed (p = 0.55). The antioxidant capacity increased nearly significantly from t2 to t3 and then remained stable in the follow-up period (p = 0.063; Fig. 3).
Fig. 3

Changes in oxidative stress and antioxidant capacity from 1 week before (n = 8; reactive oxygen species (ROS), SD ±97.16; antioxidant capacity (AoC), SD ±0.64) to 1 week after (n = 8; ROS, SD ±48.4; AoC, SD ±0.69) and 6 months after the bicycle tour (n = 7; ROS, SD ±83.35; AoC, SD ±0.28), ANOVA (standard deviation (SD), sample size (n), significance value (p) for all p > 0.05)

Discussion

The results of this pilot study suggest that a long bicycle tour with prostate cancer patients is feasible. With an appropriate preparation and medical investigation, it was possible for each participant to accomplish the 1,408 km tour. Furthermore, no problems appeared when realizing the project. The findings show that above all, the aerobic endurance performance of the prostate cancer patients improved throughout and especially prior to the tour and in the follow up. Therefore, the greatest effects were already achieved in the preparation phase. Due to the fact that the patients began the project with a good status of quality of life (corresponds to mean value of the healthy population) [29, 36], significant changes could barely be seen. Aside from the positive psychosocial influence, PSA levels were not affected by the bicycle tour. In literature, an increased PSA level is described during or directly after a biking intervention. However, this observation is a short-term effect that is caused by the mechanical stimulus during cycling [22]. In our results, we observed a long-term effect. Total testosterone levels did not change throughout the 5-week tour but then decreased in the follow-up period. These findings correspond with recent data. However, since two patients received an androgen deprivation therapy, the interpretation of the results is limited. It is scientifically well proven that long-term physical exercise can decrease total testosterone levels in healthy athletes. Acute impacts on the other hand can increase total testosterone [6, 16, 24]. These issues are mostly unexplored in cancer patients [31]. Changes in IL-6 serum levels could not be detected. Physical activity has a strong immediate effect on the IL-6 concentration which is associated with a long-term change towards an anti-inflammatory environment in the organism. Yet the scientific data is inconsistent [35, 38]. In the future, studies with long follow-up periods should be considered. When regarding the oxidative parameters, it is remarkable that both oxidative stress and antioxidant capacity values improve. It is well proven that high physical impacts increase oxidative stress levels but long-term exercise interventions decrease them, as could be shown in this pilot study [2, 12, 23]. Antioxidant capacity levels meet the standard range at all assessment time points and even increased towards an upper standard range after the tour.

The limitations of this pilot study are the small, heterogenic sample size and the missing control group. In order to gain further information on the impact of such a physical exercise program on biological markers in prostate cancer patients, more detailed research is necessary. We involved subjects which already had a good quality of life and physical performance at baseline. Therefore, greater effects could hardly be expected. Yet, in summary, our results show that long cycling tours with prostate cancer patients are feasible and could bring about long-lasting positive effects. This most likely will increase physical activity levels in prostate cancer patients and may therefore counteract inactivity-induced health problems or diseases. Finally, this can also be of particular interest for the sport tourism sector. Based on these findings, further studies must follow in order to optimize therapeutic aspects of physical activities in the rehabilitation and aftercare of a prostate cancer disease.

Declarations

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Bundesverband Prostatakrebs Selbsthilfe e.V. (BPS) for supporting this pilot project.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Molecular and Cellular Sport Medicine, Institute of Cardiovascular Research and Sport Medicine, German Sport University Cologne
(2)
Krankenhaus Nordwest, Department of Oncology and Hematology

References

  1. Aaronson N, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NNJ, Filiberti A, Flechtner H, Fleishmann SB, De Haes JCJM, Kaasa S, Klee MC, Osoba D, Razavi D, Rofe PB, Schraub S, Sneeuw KCA, Sullivan M, Takeda F (1993) The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:365–376PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson H, Karlsen A, Blomhoff R, Raastad T, Kadi F (2010) Plasma antioxidant responses and oxidative stress following a soccer game in elite female players. Scand J Med Sci Sports 20:600–608PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Barocas DA, Motley S, Cookson MS, Chang SS, Penson DF, Dai Q, Milne G, Roberts LJ, Morrow J, Concepcion RS, Smith JA Jr, Fowke JH (2011) Oxidative Stress Measured by Urine F2-Isoprostane Level Is Associated With Prostate Cancer. J Urol 185:2102–2107PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Baumann FT, Zopf AM, Bloch W (2012) Clinical exercise interventions in prostate cancer patients - a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Support Care in Cancer 20:212–233View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Galvão DA, Taaffe DR, Spry N, Newton RU (2007) Exercise can prevent and even reverse adverse effects of androgen suppression treatment in men with prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 10:340–346PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Gomez-Merino D, Chennaoui M, Drogou C, Guezennec CY (2002) Decrease in serum leptin after prolonged physical activity in men. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34:1594–1599PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Hayes S, Spence R, Galvao D, Newton R (2009) Australian Association for Exercise and Sport Science Position Stand: Optimising cancer outcomes through exercise. J of Sci and med in sport / Sports Med Australia 12:428–434View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Humpel N, Iverson D (2005) Review and critique of the quality of exercise recommendations for cancer patients and survivors. Support care in cancer 13:493–502View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Kenfield SA, Stampfer MJ, Giovannucci E, Chan JM (2011) Physical Activity and Survival After Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study. J Clin Oncol 29:726–732PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. King GA, Torres N, Potter C, Brooks TJ, Coleman KJ (2004) Comparison of Activity Monitors to Estimate Energy Cost of Treadmill Exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 36:1244–1251PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Kintzel PE, Chase SL, Schultz LM, O’Rourke T (2008) Increased risk of metabolic syndrome, diabetes mellitus, and cardiovascular disease in men receiving androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. Pharmacotherapy 28:1511–1522PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Knop K, Schwan R, Bongartz M, Bloch W, Brixius K, Baumann F (2011) Sport and Oxidative Stress in Oncological Patients. Int J Sports Med 32:960–964PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Kunkel EJS, Bakker JR, Myers RE, Oyesanmi O, Gomella LG (2000) Biopsychosocial Aspects of Prostate cancer. Psychosomatics 41:85–94PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Liedtke S, Schmidt ME, Becker S, Kaaks R, Zaineddin AK, Buck K, Flesch-Janys D, Wahrendorf J, Chang-Claude J, Steindorf K (2011) Physical Activity and Endogenous Sex Hormones in Postmenopausal Women: to What Extent Are Observed Associations Confounded or Modified by BMI? Cancer Causes Control 22:81–89PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. MacDonald R, Fink HA, Huckabay C, Monga M, Wilt TJ (2007) Pelvic floor muscle training to improve urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review of effectiveness. BJU Int 100:76–81PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. MacKelvie KJ, Taunton JE, McKay HA, Khan KM (2000) Bone mineral density and serum testosterone in chronically trained, high mileage 40–55 year old male runners. Br J Sports Med 34:273–278PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Mehnert A, Lehmann C, Schulte T, Koch U (2007) Presence of Symptom Distress and Prostate Cancer-Related Anxiety in Patients at the Beginning of Cancer Rehabilitation. Onkologie 30:551–556PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Monga U, Garber SL, Thornby J, Vallbona C, Kerrigan AJ, Monga TN, Zimmermann KP (2007) Exercise Prevents Fatigue and Improves Quality of Life in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 88:1416–1422PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Mustian KM, Morrow GG, Carroll JK, Figueroa-Moseley CD, Jean-Pierre P, Williams GC (2007) Integrative nonpharmacologic behavioral interventions for management of cancer-related fatigue. Oncologist 12:52–67PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Nahon I, Dorey G, Waddington G, Adams R (2006) Systematic Review of the Treatment Of Post-Prostatectomy Incontinence. Urol Nurs 26:461–482PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Neilson HK, Friedenreich CM, Brockton NT, Millikan RC (2009) Physical Activity and Postmenopausal Breast Cancer: Proposed Biologic Mechanisms and Areas for Future Research. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 18:11–27Google Scholar
  22. Oremek GM, Seiffert UB (1996) Physical activity releases prostate-specific antigen (PSA) from the prostate gland into blood and increases serum PSA concentrations. Clin Chem 42:691–695PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Radak Z, Chung HY, Goto S (2008) Systemic adaptation to oxidative challenge induced by regular exercise. Free Radic Biol Med 44:153–159PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  24. Risbridger GP & Frydenberg M: Endocrinology of Prostate Cancer; in: L Jacob DeGroot & DeGroot-Jameson (ed.): Endocrinology. Philadelphia, Pa.: Saunders, 1995, vol. 3–5, pp 3325–3333Google Scholar
  25. Robert-Koch-Institut und Gesellschaft der epidemiologischen Krebsregister in Deutschland e.V.: Krebs in Deutschland 2007–2008 - Häufigkeiten und Trends, ed 8, revised. Berlin, Germany, 2012Google Scholar
  26. Roddam AW, Allen NE, Appleby P, Key TJ (2008) Endogenous Sex Hormones and Prostate Cancer: a Collaborative Analysis of 18 Prospective Studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:170–183PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Saigal CS, Gore JL, Krupski TL, Hanley J, Schonlau M, Litwin MS (2007) Androgen deprivation therapy increases cardiovascular morbidity in men with prostate cancer. Cancer 110:1493–1500PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Schmitz KH, Courneya KS, Matthews C, Demark-Wahnefried W, Galvão DA, Pinto BM, Irwin ML, Wolin KY, Segal RJ, Lucia A, Schneider CM, von Gruenigen VE, Schwartz AL (2010) American College of Sports Medicine roundtable on exercise guidelines for cancer survivors. Med and Sci in sports and exercise 42:1409–1426View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Scott NW, Fayers PM, Aaronson NK, Bottomley A, de Graeff A, Groenvold M, Gundy C, Koller M, Petersen MA, Sprangers MAG: EORTC QLQ-C30 References Values, 2008.Google Scholar
  30. Segal RJ, Reid RD, Courneya KS, Malone SC, Parliament MB, Scott CG, Venner PM, Quinney HA, Jones LW (2003) Slovinec D’Angelo ME and Wells GA: Resistance Exercise in Men Receiving Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol 21:1653–1659PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Segal RJ, Reid RD, Courneya KS, Sigal RJ, Kenny GP, Prud-Homme DG, Malone SC, Wells GA, Scott CG (2009) Slovinec d´Angelo ME: Randomized Controlled Trial of Restistance or Aerobic Exercise in Men Receiving Radiation for Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol 27:344–351PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  32. Smith MR, Finkelstein JS, McGovern FJ, Zietman AL, Fallon MA, Schoenfeld DA, Kantoff PW (2002) Changes in body composition during androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 87:599–603PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  33. Stanford JL, Feng Z, Hamilton AS, Gilliland FD, Stephenson RA, Eley JW, Albertsen PC, Harlan LC, Potosky AL (2000) Urinary and Sexual Function After Radical Prostatectomy for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: The Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study. Jama 283:354–360PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Taylor LG, Canfield SE, Du XL (2009) Review of major adverse effects of androgen deprivation therapy in men with prostate cancer. Cancer 115:2388–2399PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  35. Thomas NE, Baker JS, Graham MR, Cooper SM, Davies B (2008) C-reactive protein in schoolchildren and its relation to adiposity, physical activity, aerobic fitness and habitual diet. Br J Sports Med 42:357–360PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  36. Thorsen L, Courneya KS, Stevinson C, Fossa SD (2008) A systematic review of physical activity in prostate cancer survivors: outcomes, prevalence, and determinants. Support care in cancer 16:987–997View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  37. Van Weert E, Hoekstra-Weebers J, May AM, Korstjens AM, Ros I, van der Schans CP (2008) The development of an evidence-based physical selfmanagement rehabilitation programme for cancer survivors. Patient educ and counseling 71:169–190View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Wilund KR (2007) Is the anti-inflammatory effect of regular exercise responsible for reduced cardiovascular disease? Clin Sci 112:543–555PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  39. Windsor PM, Nicol KF, Potter J (2004) A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Aerobic Exercise for Treatment-Related Fatigue in Men Receiving Radical External Beam Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Carcinoma. Cancer 101:550–557PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity (EGREPA) 2013

Advertisement