Oral Presentation Clinical Oncology Society of Australia Annual Scientific Meeting 2023

Exercise delivery is feasible, but recruitment is not for women following treatment for gynaecological: Preliminary findings from the Enhancing treatment outcomes after gynaecological cancer (ACUMEN) study (#84)

Grace L Rose 1 2 , Janine Porter-Steele 3 , Vivian Chiu 3 , Brent J Cunningham 3 , Alex N Boytar 3 , Briana Clifford 4 , Fernanda Luft 3 , Alexandra McCarthy 3 5
  1. School of Health, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, Queensland, Australia
  2. School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia
  3. School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia
  4. School of Health Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  5. Mater Misericordiae, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Background: Exercise for breast cancer populations can reduce treatment side effects, however, little support and evidence is available for the 20,000 Australian women treated for gynaecological cancer to implement exercise. This ongoing randomised controlled trial primarily investigates the effects of individualised exercise on quality of life. Preliminary feasibility of this program is presented.

Methods: After baseline assessment, women following treatment for gynaecological cancer [n=97, ovarian=26%, median age=58 years (range 21-82), mean body mass index=28.3 kg/m2 (range 19.7-55.3)] were randomised (1:1) to supervised exercise training with an Accredited Exercise Physiologist (AEP), or usual care. The exercise group completed three, ~60-minute combined aerobic and resistance exercise sessions per week for 12 weeks (50% self-managed). An intervention acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility measure (AAFIM; 5-point Likert scale) was collected from participants (n=41), and AEPs (n=33) to assess perceived domain ratings. Additionally, study uptake and reasons for declining to participate were captured.

Results: Almost all participants and AEPs agreed that the program met their approval and was appealing across acceptability domains (participants and AEP=100%); was suitable across appropriateness domains (participants and AEP=100%); and was implementable across all feasibility domains (participants=100%, AEP=94%). The majority “completely agreed” with these statements (score=5/5, participants=67-80%, AEP=60-73%). Attendance (89%) and compliance (80%) to the intervention are high. Meanwhile, recruitment to the study is low (24%) compared to median recruitment rate of other exercise oncology studies (38%). The most common reasons for declining to participate were lack of interest (25%) and busyness (20%).

Conclusions: Despite preliminary acceptance of the program by participants and AEPs, there remains an imbalance between feasibility of program delivery compared to program uptake. Our results suggest that future exercise implementation for women following treatment for gynaecological cancers must focus on strategies to enhance the enrolment of women who are disinterested in exercise and time poor.