Cancer Prehabilitation Research Articles

Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) Prehabilitation: Advantages and Limitations.

Cancer prehabilitation is the process between the time of cancer diagnosis and the beginning of the active acute treatment; prehabilitation consists of various need-based interventions, e.g., physical activity, a nutritional program, and psychological support. It can be delivered as unimodal or multimodal interventions. Physical activity, including resistant exercise and aerobic activities, has to be tailored according to the patient's characteristics; nutritional support is aimed at preventing malnutrition and sarcopenia; while psychological intervention intercepts the patient's distress and supports specific intervention to address it. In addition, multimodal prehabilitation could have a potential impact on the immune system, globally reducing the inflammatory processes and, as a consequence, influencing cancer progression. However, many challenges are still to be addressed, foremost among them the feasibility of prehabilitation programs, the lack of adequate facilities for these programs' implementation, and the fact that not all prehabilitation interventions are reimbursed by the national health system.

Empowering Wellness: A Comprehensive Narrative Review of Cancer Prehabilitation from Treatment Onset to Surveillance.

Cancer prehabilitation, defined as a process occurring between cancer diagnosis and the onset of acute treatment, is highlighted for its ability to enhance physical and mental health results while decreasing overall healthcare costs. This summary introduces the concept of cancer prehabilitation and emphasises the crucial role of oncology nurses in rehabilitation care. The cancer treatment plan of prehabilitation requires timely and efficient assessment across the care continuum, focusing on enhancing outcomes at every stage of cancer. The battle with cancer involves three different assessments with distinct goals: i) prehabilitation evaluation before treatment, ii) early post-treatment evaluations of rehabilitation and iii) final evaluations of health promotion. Analyses and treatments for significant side effects or complications associated with the treatment specifically for prehabilitation are recommended. The roles of coordination, counseling, preparing for discharge and teaching are outlined as integral components of a cancer nurse's responsibilities in the prevention of cancer. A literature search from March 2016 to June 2023 was conducted using the keywords 'neoplasms,' 'cancer,' 'prehabilitation,' 'continuum of care,' 'care continuum,' 'patient care continuity,' 'epidemiology,' 'therapeutics,' 'health,' 'prevention and control' and 'guidelines as topic.' The findings suggest that care coordinators or navigators for cancer should be educated to assess the physical and psychological status of patients once a cancer diagnosis is confirmed, particularly for those awaiting surgery at home. To enhance their competence in prehabilitation care, oncology nurses are encouraged to gain knowledge of certain tumours' outcomes and cancer-related treatments. Additionally, improving the ability to evaluate patients' functional status and emotional distress is crucial for oncology nurses involved in cancer prehabilitation.

CSP2023: 172 - Evaluation of the Active Together multi-modal cancer prehabilitation and rehabilitation service embedded within clinical care cancer pathway

CSP2023: 172 - Evaluation of the Active Together multi-modal cancer prehabilitation and rehabilitation service embedded within clinical care cancer pathway

Access, acceptance and adherence to cancer prehabilitation: a mixed-methods systematic review.

The purpose of this systematic review is to better understand access to, acceptance of and adherence to cancer prehabilitation. MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Embase, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, ProQuest Medical Library, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and grey literature were systematically searched for quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies published in English between January 2017 and June 2023. Screening, data extraction and critical appraisal were conducted by two reviewers independently using Covidence™ systematic review software. Data were analysed and synthesised thematically to address the question 'What do we know about access, acceptance and adherence to cancer prehabilitation, particularly among socially deprived and minority ethnic groups?' The protocol is published on PROSPERO CRD42023403776 RESULTS: Searches identified 11,715 records, and 56 studies of variable methodological quality were included: 32 quantitative, 15 qualitative and nine mixed-methods. Analysis identified facilitators and barriers at individual and structural levels, and with interpersonal connections important for prehabilitation access, acceptance and adherence. No study reported analysis of facilitators and barriers to prehabilitation specific to people from ethnic minority communities. One study described health literacy as a barrier to access for people from socioeconomically deprived communities. There is limited empirical research of barriers and facilitators to inform improvement in equity of access to cancer prehabilitation. To enhance the inclusivity of cancer prehabilitation, adjustments may be needed to accommodate individual characteristics and attention given to structural factors, such as staff training. Interpersonal connections are proposed as a fundamental ingredient for successful prehabilitation.

Establishing Innovative Complex Services: Learning from the Active Together Cancer Prehabilitation and Rehabilitation Service.

Prehabilitation and rehabilitation will be essential services in an ageing population to support patients with cancer to live well through their life spans. Active Together is a novel evidence-based service embedded within existing healthcare pathways in an innovative collaboration between health, academic, and charity organisations. Designed to improve outcomes for cancer patients and reduce the demand on healthcare resources, it offers physical, nutritional, and psychological prehabilitation and rehabilitation support to patients undergoing cancer treatment. The service is underpinned by behaviour change theories and an individualised and personalised approach to care, addressing the health inequalities that might come about through age, poverty, ethnicity, or culture. Meeting the challenge of delivering high-quality services across multiple stakeholders, while addressing the complexity of patient need, has required skilled leadership, flexibility, and innovation. To support patients equally, regardless of geography or demographics, future services will need to be scaled regionally and be available in locations amenable to the populations they serve. To deliver these services across wide geographic regions, involving multiple providers and complex patient pathways, will require a systems approach. This means embracing and addressing the complexity of the contexts within which these services are delivered, to ensure efficient, high-quality provision of care, while supporting staff well-being and meeting the needs of patients.

A qualitative evaluation of a multi-modal cancer prehabilitation programme for colorectal, head and neck and lung cancers patients.

Growing evidence indicates patients' survivorship outcomes can be enhanced through active engagement in a multi-modal cancer prehabilitation programme (MCPP), although this intervention is not uniformly embedded as a standard of care. MCPP aims to optimise patients physiologically and psychologically for cancer treatments, shorten recovery time, reduce complications, promote healthier lifestyles and improve quality of life. South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust (SET) developed and evaluated a system-wide collaborative approach to MMCP across three tumour groups (colorectal, lung, head and neck cancer). Addressing the lack of qualitative evaluation of MCPPs, this novel paper explores mechanisms promoting feasibility and acceptability of MCPP from patients' and interdisciplinary professionals' perspectives. Semi-structured virtual one-to-one interviews were conducted with 24 interdisciplinary professionals and nine patients. Transcripts were recorded, transcribed verbatim and themes developed using Framework Analysis. Analysis of findings identified three themes providing an in-depth understanding of key elements required to develop and promote system-wide delivery of a MCPP: 1) Equipping the team: Capability and capacity, 2) Timing of intervention and delivery timeframe and 3) Systems and processes. The system-wide collaborative approach to developing a MCPP was deemed both feasible and acceptable. Success was attributed to visionary leadership, alongside a diverse group of interdisciplinary professionals being engaged, motivated and committed to intervention delivery in an effort to improve patient outcomes. Iterative, responsive troubleshooting during initial delivery is required to facilitate successful implementation. Further training is required for greater adherence to provision of prescriptive high intensity exercise within the programme, which may further promote enhanced patient outcomes. To enable sustainability of MCPP, ongoing training for professionals and funding is required.

Evaluation of nutrition components within prehabilitation programs in gastrointestinal cancers: Is prehab worth the hype?

Nutrition impact symptoms and unintended weight loss are prevalent in patients with gastrointestinal cancers, especially during the perioperative period or while prescribed anticancer treatments. Because patients may experience loss of lean body mass and malnutrition, aggressive nutrition intervention prior to surgery should be considered. Cancer prehabilitation is a process spanning the care continuum from diagnosis to the time of surgery encompassing nutrition support, psychological and physical assessment, and targeted interventions. Thirteen studies published between 2013 and 2023 were included in this review and evaluated prehabilitation programs' impact on postoperative outcomes in patients with gastrointestinal cancers. Literature continues to emerge supporting the integration of nutrition into a prehabilitation program because of its potential to contribute to improved clinical outcomes, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness, but considerable variation exists with respect to the specific recommendations provided by current prehabilitation programs.

Prehabilitation in the lung cancer pathway: a scoping review

BackgroundLung cancer is the third most common type of cancer in the UK. Treatment outcomes are poor and UK deaths from lung cancer are higher than any other cancer. Prehabilitation has shown to be an important means of preparing patients both physically and psychologically for cancer treatment. However, little is understood about the context and mechanisms of prehabilitation that can impact physiological and psychological wellbeing.Our aim was to review and summarise primary research on prehabilitation in the lung cancer pathway using a realist approach.MethodsA scoping review of empirical primary research was conducted. Five online medical databases from 2016 – February 2023 were searched. All articles reporting on prehabilitation in lung cancer were included in the review. For this review, prehabilitation was defined as either a uni-modal or multi-modal intervention including exercise, nutrition and/or psychosocial support within a home, community or hospital based setting. A realist framework of context, mechanism and outcome was used to assist with the interpretation of findings.ResultsIn total, 31 studies were included in the review, of which, three were published study protocols. Over 95% of studies featured an exercise component as part of a prehabilitation programme. Twenty-six of the studies had a surgical focus. Only two studies reported using theory to underpin the design of this complex intervention. There was large heterogeneity across all studies as well as a lack of clinical trials to provide definitive evidence on the programme design, setting, type of intervention, patient criteria, delivery, duration and outcome measures used.ConclusionA standardised prehabilitation programme for lung cancer patients does not yet exist. Future lung cancer prehabilitation programmes should take into account patient led values, needs, goals, support structures and beliefs, as these factors can affect the delivery and engagement of interventions. Future research should consider using a conceptual framework to conceptualise the living with and beyond cancer experience to help shape and inform personalised prehabilitation services.

Cardiotoxicity and cancer care: scoping review exploring current home-based, self-management cancer care interventions

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Public Institution(s). Main funding source(s): NHS Lothian Background/Introduction Cardiotoxicity is heart damage that occurs as consequence of some cancer treatments and drugs. Gaining a better understanding of current cancer prehabilitation and rehabilitation programmes, specifically facilitated, home-based programmes, can better illuminate how interventions can aid patients in their cancer, and possible cardiac journey. This scoping review sets out to explore the provision of multimodal, cancer prehabilitation and rehabilitation programmes available to patients. Home-based, self-management, multidimensional cancer interventions (HSMCIs) are increasing in number, due to the growing population of people living with and beyond cancer. These multimodal programmes target a range of physical and psychosocial factors to improve self-management and quality of life amongst cancer patients during prehabilitation and rehabilitation. However, preliminary searches indicate that the interventions vary significantly in their definitions of key terms, target demographics, implementation success and evidence-base. Purpose This scoping review aims to assess the nature, extent and remit of existing HSMCIs, identify their strengths, limitations, potential barriers to access and obstacles to their implementation, and clarify key terms and concepts within the field. Methods Key word searches were performed in AMED, Cochrane, PsychInfo, Medline, CINAHL and Embase databases from 2010 to 2022 to identify papers relevant to HSMCIs. Study characteristics for inclusion were home-based, multimodal, non-centre based interventions that dealt with prehabilitaton and/or rehabilitation for cancer patients, while incorporating psychological, physical and nutritional components. Results The search gleaned a total of 302 results. These results were screened independently by two investigators with a third member conducting spot checks to ensure rigor. Early findings were then cross-referenced and irrelevant papers and duplicates were removed. A total of 38 results remained that fulfilled inclusion criteria. The scoping review found that few programmes were truly multimodal taking a general approach to cancer, instead targeted one or two specific cancers. Fewer still had mention of cardiotoxicity and how to manage heart health during cancer treatment. Conclusions This scoping review has highlighted the gap for a HSMCI in care provision to cover the range of biopsychosocial support needed for those living with and beyond cancer. Consistent with earlier research it emphasises the necessity for promoting cardiovascular health in this population.

The impact of cancer prehabilitation on psychological outcomes and quality of life in patients with gastro-oesophageal cancer.

e16096 Background: The impact of cancer on psychological health and health related quality of life (HRQoL) is complex and involves an interaction between pre-existing and cancer related psychological morbidity and symptoms. Factors such as self-efficacy are known predictors of recovery and HRQoL. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of multi-modal personalised prehabilitation on psychological outcomes and HRQoL in patients with curable oesophageal and gastric (OG) cancer. Methods: Data was collected for to all patients treated at a specialist centre between Jan 2016 and June 2018. Patients received multi-modal (physical, nutrition and psychological) prehabilitation from diagnosis into the post-operative period. Data on self-efficacy (SE), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS) and HRQoL (European Organization for Research and treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30)) were collected at diagnosis (T1), completion of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (T2) and 3 months after surgery (T3). A previously validated mapping function was used for predicting Euro QoL 5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) from scale scores of the EORTC QLQ-C30 instrument to derive a EQ health utility (EQ-HU). Results: 137 patients underwent surgery. 86 patients underwent a thoracotomy in addition to a laparotomy. 107 patients received neo-adjuvant treatment. There was a significant improvement in SE [8.2 (6.2-9) to 8.8 (7.8-9.7); p = 0.002] and anxiety [5 (3-8) to 4 (2,7); p = 0.04] but not depression [2 (1-5) to 3 (1-5); p = 0.26] between T1 and T2. There were no differences between T2 and T3. There were no differences in global HRQoL and the individual scales of the EORTC QLQ-C30 between T1 and T2. However, between T2 and T3, there were significant reductions in global HRQoL [69.6 (18.2) to 64.7 (20.9); p = 0.04], physical [83.2 (18.2) to 70.9 (20.5); p = 0.001], role [79 (28.6) to 70.9 (28.3; p = 0.02], cognitive [84.2 (22.3) to 76 (23.3); p = 0.004] and social [79 (24.2) to 65.5 (26.1); p = 0.001] but not emotional functions [80.1 (21.4) to 79.5 (23.3); p = 0.67]. Mapping revealed that there was a significant improvement in EQ-HU from T1 to T2 [0.54 (0.52) to 0.79 (0.34); p = 0.001] and a significant fall from T2 to T3 [ 0.79 (0.34) to 0.58 (0.44); p = 0.001]. The minimum and maximum predicted values matched those of the validated mapping function used. Conclusions: This study shows that prehabilitation can have a significant impact on HU in patients on chemotherapy. Despite the well-recognised limitations of mapping, HU at baseline was comparable to that shown in previous research in OG cancer patients. Reduction in HRQoL seen after surgery was much less than previously published research, suggesting the protective effect of prehabilitation. Physical function deterioration, in particular was much less than anticipated.

Socioeconomic status influences participation in cancer prehabilitation and preparation for surgical recovery: A pooled retrospective analysis using a validated area-level socioeconomic status metric.

Prehabilitation employs exercise, nutrition, and psychological interventions to optimize physiological status in preparation for surgery. First, we described the extent to which material deprivation index score (MDIS) influenced prehabilitation participation. Second, we evaluated the extent to which prehabilitation influenced recovery as compared to control. Pooled patient records from prospective multimodal prehabilitation studies in oncologic surgery were retrospectively examined. Patient postal codes were linked to their MDIS, a validated area-level socioeconomic status (SES) metric, as quintiles 1-5 (1=highest SES). Functional capacity was evaluated with the 6-min walking test (6MWT) at baseline, before, and 8 weeks post-surgery. Influence of prehabilitation on length of hospital stay (LOS) was explored using generalized linear models with a negative binomial distribution adjusted for age, sex, surgical population, and MDIS. Recruitment records were available from 2014 onwards, yielding 1013 eligible patients for prehabilitation participation with MDIS data. Fewer patients with a low SES enrolled (Q1:62% vs. Q5:47%; P = 0.01) and remained in prehabilitation studies (Q1: 59% vs. Q5: 45%; P = 0.07). Prehabilitation study records were available from 2008 onward, yielding 886 enrolled patients with MDIS data (n = 510 prehabilitation, n = 376 control). Preoperative 6MWT similarly improved by > 20 m in response to prehabilitation across SES strata (P < 0.05). Postoperative 6MWT could not be evaluated due to substantial missing data. Prehabilitation had a significant protective influence on LOS, as compared to control, in unadjusted and adjusted models [adjusted IRR:0.77 (95% CI:0.68 to 0.87; P < 0.001]. Findings suggest that prehabilitation is effective across all SES; however, participation across SES quintiles was not equal. Barriers to participation must be identified and addressed. Once these barriers are addressed, prehabilitation may reduce surgical disparities among SES.

Outcomes of a Multi-Modal Hospital-Associated Home-Based Cancer Prehabilitation Program.

To assess the impact of a "one-stop", multi-modal, hospital-associated-home-based prehabilitation model, helmed by a small core team, on newly diagnosed gastrointestinal and urological cancer patients planned for surgery. This is a retrospective study in a tertiary public hospital, involving all newly diagnosed gastrointestinal and urological cancer patients planned for surgery. The primary outcome measure was the 6-minute walk test (6MWT). Other outcomes included physical, psychological and quality-of-life measures, and patient satisfaction surveys, taken at baseline, pre-operatively (post-prehabilitation), and at 3 months post-operatively. When comparing the baseline to pre-operatively (post-prehabilitation), there was a statistically significant improvement in the 6MWT (21.52 m, p<0.001), 30-Second Sit to Stand test (STS) (1.08 repetitions, p<0.001), Timed Up and Go test (TUG) (0.83 seconds, p=0.014) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) (total score 1.77, p<0.001). These were sustained (6MWT: 0.22, p=0.964; STS: 0.08 repetitions, p=0.863; TUG: 0.04 seconds, p=0.939) or further improved (HADS total score 2.06, p=0.003) at 3 months post-operatively. There was also a statistically significant improvement in the EuroQol-5 dimension health score (health-related quality-of-life measure) from baseline to 3 months post-operatively (7.04 points, p=0.001), with more than 90% overall patient satisfaction reported. Prehabilitation applied via our model resulted in significant improvements in functional capacity, psychological and quality-of-life outcomes, sustained at 3 months post-operatively, and is a feasible and effective approach that is well-received by our patients.

Bibliometric analysis of global research on physical activity and sedentary behavior in the context of cancer.

Numerous studies focusing on sedentary behavior (SB) and physical activity (PA) in the context of cancer have been reported in recent years. We analyzed and visualized studies on SB and PA in patients with cancer over the last 20 years using scientometric methods, to provide insights on gaps and deficiencies in the literature, and to inform future research guidelines. All relevant studies in the field from 2001 to October 2022 were reviewed using bibliometric tools, including VOSviewer, Bibliometric online analysis platform, and biblioshiny, to determine the most influential countries, institutions, journals, and authors. We explored current research hotpots and potential research trends, based on keyword clustering and dynamic changes. Our research focuses on PA, SB, and cancer across the entire cancer continuum, from primary prevention to treatment to cancer survivorship. Scientometric analysis identified 4,382 relevant manuscripts on SB and PA in the context of cancer, with a 10-fold increase in articles over the past 20 years. The United States, Canada, and Australia were the most influential countries. The journal, Supportive Care in Cancer, had the highest number of publications, while Clinical Oncology had the highest H-index. K.S. Courneya was the most influential author in this field, with the highest number of publications, total citations, and H-index. Keyword analysis revealed that current research is focused on PA and SB in patients with breast cancer, quality of life, and aerobic exercise. Future frontiers include cancer prehabilitation programs and cardiorespiratory fitness, and remote intervention and social support. By using bibliometrics, we conducted a comprehensive review of SB and PA in cancer-related studies. The current research focused on exercise and sedentariness in breast cancer patients and the role of PA in improving quality of life in survivorship. Emerging research foci were generally around cancer prehabilitation programs and remote intervention issues for PA. In addition, some publication deficits are noted: studies of PA and SB in less common cancers; the recommended doses and intensities of exercise for cancer; the timing of interventions for prehabilitation and the establishment of individualized exercise protocols. These deficiencies align with the needs for future research topics.

Addition of the nutrition factor enhances the cancer prehabilitation program design for colorectal cancer patients: a multi-center cohort study

Addition of the nutrition factor enhances the cancer prehabilitation program design for colorectal cancer patients: a multi-center cohort study

Cost Analysis of a Digital Multimodal Cancer Prehabilitation.

There is growing evidence that prehabilitation programmes effectively improve the physical and psychological conditions of cancer patients awaiting treatment. During the pandemic, people with cancer were classed as vulnerable. To reduce risk to this population Kent and Medway Prehabilitation service transformed into a TeleHealth format. The aim of this study is to assess the impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and the costs of a digital multimodal prehabilitation programme. HRQoL was measured with the EQ-5D and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated. Costs of the prehabilitation service and inpatient care were calculated. Comparisons were made between different levels of prehabilitation received. A sample of 192 individuals was included in the study Mean HRQoL improved from 69.53 at baseline to 85.71 post-rehabilitation, a 23% increase. For each additional week of prehabilitation care in cancer patients, the model predicts that the total QALYS increase by 0.02, when baseline utility is held constant. Prehabilitation is associated with improved HRQoL and QALYs. Our model of a multimodal digital prehabilitation program can be beneficial for patients and reduce costs for healthcare facilities even when the patients attend only a few sessions.

Perspectives on the Direction of Cancer Prehabilitation in the Pandemic and Beyond.

Growing attention has been placed on cancer prehabilitation in the recent years as the number of publications increase. The real-world application of prehabilitation remains heterogeneous and its implementation has been challenging during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the pandemic has also provided impetus for change-leveraging technology and digitalization. This paper will discuss the pre-existing models of care, adaptations that had taken place in the pandemic, the model of care in the author's institution and the future direction of cancer prehabilitation.

Nutritional screening in a cancer prehabilitation programme: A cohort study.

Cancer patients are often malnourished pre-operatively. The present study aimed to establish whether current screening was appropriate for use in prehabilitation and investigate any association between nutritional risk, functionality and quality of life (QoL). This cohort study used routinely collected data from September 2020 to August 2021 from patients in a Prehab4cancer programme. Included patients were aged ≥ 18 years, had colorectal, lung or oesophago-gastric cancer and were scheduled for surgery. Nutritional assessment included Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) Short-Form and QoL with a sit-to-stand test. Association between nutritional risk and outcomes was analysed using adjusted logistic regression. From 928 patients referred to Prehab4Cancer service over 12 months, data on nutritional risk were collected from 526 patients. Pre-operatively, 233 out of 526 (44%) patients were at nutritional risk (score ≥ 2). During prehabilitation, 31% of patients improved their PG-SGA and 74% of patients maintained or improved their weight. Odds ratios (OR) with confidence intervals (CI) showed that patients with better QoL using EuroQol-5 Dimensions (OR = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.45, p = 0.01), EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale (OR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.93, 1.00, p = 0.04) or sit-to-stand (OR = 0.96, 95% 0.93, 1.00, p = 0.04) were less likely to be nutritional at risk. Almost half of patients in Prehab4Cancer programme assessed using PG-SGA were at risk of malnutrition. However, almost half of the sample did not have their risk assessed. Patients at risk of malnutrition were more likely to have a poorer QoL and sit-to-stand test than those who were not at risk.

Feasibility and outcomes of a real-world regional lung cancer prehabilitation programme in the UK

BackgroundPrehabilitation, or multimodality patient optimisation before major treatment, has demonstrated meaningful improvements in patients' outcomes. In the setting of lung cancer surgery, postoperative complications and length of hospital stay are reduced, but there is currently limited access to prehabilitation. Prehab4Cancer (P4C) is an innovative regional programme serving all areas of Greater Manchester (GM). MethodsThe lung cancer P4C service commenced in 2019 as a collaboration between the GM Cancer alliance and 12 leisure and community organisations. Patients planning surgical resection could be referred to receive exercise, nutrition, and well-being assessment and interventions before surgery. We evaluated the programme's feasibility, uptake, and outcomes during the 11 months before COVID-19 restrictions. ResultsIn total, 377 patients were referred to the lung cancer P4C service from all 11 hospitals in GM. Of the patients reached by telephone, 80.0% (n=280/348) attended initial P4C assessment, which occurred a median of 8 days (inter-quartile range [IQR]: 4–14) after referral. In addition, 74.3% (n=280/377) attended for baseline assessment and 47.7% (n=180/377) completed prehabilitation, attending a median of six sessions (IQR: 4–9). Statistically significant improvements in all objective physiological and subjective functional assessments were observed preoperatively, including a mean increase in the incremental shuttle walk test of 50 m (95% confidence interval: 25–74; P<0.001). ConclusionsThe P4C programme demonstrated feasibility at scale, high uptake, and promising impact on the status of patients with lung cancer before surgery. P4C is the first regional prehabilitation service internationally, and this evaluation provides a framework for implementing similar services in other regions.

Cancer Prehabilitation in Practice: the Current Evidence.

This article serves to describe recent controversies in cancer prehabilitation including efficacy, dose, cost effectiveness, stakeholder input, and international implementation. Appropriate frequency, type, and timing have yet to be determined, but high intensity exercise is recommended. Costs are favorable when modeled and information on costs of real-world application are forthcoming. Patients are interested in and willing to attend cancer prehabilitation. Cancer prehabilitation research is spreading throughout the world. Cancer prehabilitation includes assessment of a newly diagnosed cancer patient's baseline fitness and targeted interventions to improve their health before surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation. Cancer prehabilitation improves fitness as measured preoperatively and improves outcomes postoperatively.

Geographical inequalities in cancer prehabilitation. Can m-Health applications be the answer?

Geographical inequalities in cancer prehabilitation. Can m-Health applications be the answer?