» Articles » PMID: 39556130

Associations of Physical Activity and Sedentary Time with Health-related Quality of Life in Patients with Localized Renal Cell Cancer: a Cross-sectional Analysis Within the ReLife Study

Overview
Specialties Critical Care
Oncology
Date 2024 Nov 18
PMID 39556130
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: This study examined the associations of device-measured moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and sedentary time as well as self-reported MVPA with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with localized renal cell cancer (RCC) in the recovery phase after surgery.

Methods: At 3 months post-surgery, 341 patients with stage I-III RCC participating in the ReLife study wore an ActivPAL3 device to determine MVPA and sedentary time. The SQUASH questionnaire was used for assessing self-reported MVPA, and the EORTC QLQ-C30 for assessing HRQoL (range 0-100). Multivariable linear regression models were used to examine the cross-sectional associations of MVPA and sedentary time with HRQoL.

Results: The highest (≥ 6.7 h/week) versus lowest (≤ 2.7 h/week) quartile of MVPA was associated with a better global health status (β, 10.2; 95% CI, 5.1, 15.3), summary score (β, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.1, 8.1), physical (β, 7.7; 95% CI, 3.8, 11.6), role (β, 12.4; 95% CI, 4.7, 20.2), and social functioning (β, 7.3; 95% CI, 0.2, 14.4), and lower fatigue (β, - 11.2; 95% CI, - 18.1, - 4.2). Results for self-reported MVPA were in the same direction but weaker. The lowest (≤ 8.8 h/day) versus highest (≥ 11.5 h/day) quartile of sedentary time was associated with better physical functioning (β, 4.6; 95% CI, 0.8, 8.5).

Conclusions: In patients with localized RCC, higher MVPA 3 months post-surgery was associated with better HRQoL outcomes including less fatigue whereas lower sedentary time was only associated with better physical functioning. This information can contribute to the development of physical activity guidelines and interventions to improve HRQoL.

References
1.
Matias M, Baciarello G, Neji M, Di Meglio A, Michiels S, Partridge A . Fatigue and physical activity in cancer survivors: A cross-sectional population-based study. Cancer Med. 2019; 8(5):2535-2544. PMC: 6536944. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.2060. View

2.
Prince S, Adamo K, Hamel M, Hardt J, Connor Gorber S, Tremblay M . A comparison of direct versus self-report measures for assessing physical activity in adults: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2008; 5:56. PMC: 2588639. DOI: 10.1186/1479-5868-5-56. View

3.
Sweegers M, Boyle T, Vallance J, Chinapaw M, Brug J, Aaronson N . Which cancer survivors are at risk for a physically inactive and sedentary lifestyle? Results from pooled accelerometer data of 1447 cancer survivors. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2019; 16(1):66. PMC: 6698042. DOI: 10.1186/s12966-019-0820-7. View

4.
Chastin S, Dontje M, Skelton D, cukic I, Shaw R, Gill J . Systematic comparative validation of self-report measures of sedentary time against an objective measure of postural sitting (activPAL). Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2018; 15(1):21. PMC: 5828279. DOI: 10.1186/s12966-018-0652-x. View

5.
Giesinger J, Kieffer J, Fayers P, Groenvold M, Petersen M, Scott N . Replication and validation of higher order models demonstrated that a summary score for the EORTC QLQ-C30 is robust. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015; 69:79-88. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.007. View