Comparison of the effects of high-intensity interval and moderate-intensity continuous training on inflammatory markers, cardiorespiratory fitness, and quality of life in breast cancer patients

Abstract

BackgroundAs the effectiveness of breast cancer treatment has improved, a growing number of long-term breast cancer survivors are seeking help for unique health problems. These patients may be at increased risk of cardiovascular disease due to the side effects of treatment. The positive impact of most types of exercise has been repeatedly reported in people with cancer, but the most effective exercise approaches for maximum beneficial adaptations remain controversial. Thus, this study aimed to compare the effects of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on inflammatory indices, adipokines, metabolic markers, body composition, cardiorespiratory fitness, and quality of life in breast cancer patients during adjuvant endocrine therapy. MethodsThirty non-metastatic breast cancer patients during adjuvant endocrine therapy who had been treated with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy were recruited from Iran and randomized to HIIT, MICT, or control groups for a supervised exercise intervention that took place 3 times a week for 12 weeks. The training intensity was determined based on the peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak), and the volume of training was matched in HIIT and MICT based on the VO2peak. Body composition, functional capacity, cardiorespiratory fitness, metabolic indices, sex hormones, adipokines, and inflammatory markers were assessed before and after the intervention. ResultsThe VO2peak increased by 16.8% in the HIIT group in comparison to baseline values (mean difference = 3.61 mL/kg/min). HIIT significantly improved the VO2peak compared to control (mean difference = 3.609 mL/kg/min) and MICT (mean differences = 2.974 mL/kg/min) groups. Both HIIT (mean difference = 9.172 mg/dL) and MICT (mean difference = 7.879 mg/dL) interventions significantly increased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels compared to the control group. The analysis of covariance showed that physical well-being significantly improved in MICT compared to control group (mean difference = 3.268). HIIT significantly improved the social well-being compared to the control group (mean difference = 4.412). Emotional well-being subscale was significantly improved in both MICT (mean difference = 4.248) and HIIT (mean difference = 4.412) compared to the control group. Functional well-being scores significantly increased in HIIT group compared with control group (mean difference = 3.35) . Significant increase were also observed in total functional assessment of cancer therapy-General scores in both HIIT (mean difference = 14.204) and MICT groups (mean difference = 10.036) compared with control group. The serum level of suppressor of cytokine signaling 3 increased significantly (mean difference = 0.09 pg/mL) in the HIIT group compared to the baseline. There were no significant differences between groups for body weight, body mass index, fasting blood glucose, insulin resistance, sex hormone binding globulin, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, adipokines, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-α, or interleukin-10. ConclusionHIIT can be used as a safe, feasible, and time-efficient intervention to improve cardiovascular fitness in breast cancer patients. Both HIIT and MICT modalities enhance quality of life. Further large-scale studies will help determine whether these promising results translate into improved clinical and oncological outcomes.