4.5 Article

Cardiorespiratory fitness and cancer in women: A prospective pilot study

Journal

JOURNAL OF SPORT AND HEALTH SCIENCE
Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages 457-462

Publisher

SHANGHAI UNIV SPORT
DOI: 10.1016/j.jshs.2019.02.001

Keywords

Exercise capacity; Exercise testing; Fitness; Public health

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To assess the association between cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) and the incidence and mortality from cancer in women, and to evaluate the potential public health implications for cancer prevention. Methods: Maximal exercise testing was performed in a pilot cohort of 184 women (59.3 +/- 15.2 years) who were followed for 12.0 +/- 6.9 years. Cox hazard models adjusted for established cancer risk factors and accounting for competing events were analyzed for all-type cancer incidence and mortality from cancer. Population-attributable risks and exposure impact number were determined for low CRF (<5 metabolic equivalents (METs)) as a risk factor. Results: During the follow-up, 11.4% of the participants were diagnosed with cancer and 3.2% died from cancer. CRF was inversely and independently associated with cancer outcomes. For every 1-metabolic equivalent increase in CRF, there was a 20% decrease in the risk of cancer incidence (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CB: 0.69-0.92; p = 0.001) and a 26% reduction in risk of cancer mortality (HR = 0.74, 95%CI: 0.61-0.90; p = 0.002). The population-attributable risks of low CRF were 11.6% and 14% for incidence and mortality of cancer, respectively, and the respective exposure impact numbers were 8 and 20. Conclusion: Greater CRF was independently associated with a lower risk of incidence and mortality from cancer in women. Screening for low CRF as a cancer risk factor and referring unfit individuals to a supervised exercise program could be a public health strategy for cancer prevention in middle-age women. (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Shanghai University of Sport.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available