Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 42714641

Exercise and pathologic complete response to cancer treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is a commonly recommended approach for treating several cancers, and improving patients' outcomes to this therapy is important. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the impact of exercise on pathologic complete response (pCR), a key short-term marker of treatment efficacy, in patients with solid tumors receiving NACT. METHODS: Four electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials with physical exercise during NACT as an intervention published until May 2025. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane RoB 2.0 and the TESTEX scale. A random-effect meta-analysis using the inverse variance method synthesized the results. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 and chi2 statistics. Risk ratio estimated the effect size. RESULTS: Eight studies involving 504 patients with breast, esophageal, gastric, or rectal cancer were included in the final analysis. Exercise interventions consisted of aerobic and resistance exercise. Overall, there were no significant differences between exercise and control groups in the rate of pCR to NACT (pooled risk ratio: 1.08 (95% CI: 0.82 to 1.43) Z = 0.56, p = 0.58). However, meta-regression data from breast cancer (BC) studies (4 studies, 367 participants) suggest exercise may be associated with enhanced tumor response to NACT in HR + /HER2- subtypes (regression coefficient: 0.83 (95% CI: -0.00 to 1.67), p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Exercise during NACT did not improve pCR across cancer types. Exploratory meta-regression findings suggest a possible benefit of exercise in BC patients with the HR + /HER2- subtype. These results should be interpreted with caution due to the small number of studies and low certainty of the evidence.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Nuno Dias Rato, Catarina Garcia, Diogo Pinto, Helena Guedes, Ana Joaquim, Sofia Viamonte, Luisa Helguero, João Viana, Alberto Alves. 2026-09-09. Exercise and pathologic complete response to cancer treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-026-11156-1

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Response-adapted surgical de-escalation following neoadjuvant immunotherapy in resectable mucosal HNSCC A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Recent encouraging outcomes with neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) have generated interest in surgical de-escalation. However, the oncologic safety of response-adapted surgery (RAS) and its ability to achieve survival outcomes comparable to baseline-planned surgery (BPS) remain uncertain. METHODS: A systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the Clinical Trials Registry for studies of neoadjuvant ICIs, with or without chemotherapy, in resectable mucosal HNSCC, that explicitly report surgical extent, between 2020-2025 was performed. Two independent reviewers extracted data following PRISMA guidelines. Main outcomes included major pathologic response (MPR), pathologic complete response (pCR), event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS). Study-level proportions were pooled by random effects models. Heterogeneity was assessed by the I2 statistic. RESULTS: The comparative analysis consisted of 4 RAS studies (involving 202 patients) and 11 BPS studies (403 patients). The pooled overall EFS was 83.3% (76.9-88.2) for the former and 82% (75.2-87.2) for the latter (P=.751), and the respective pooled OS was 92.3% (87.5-95.3) and 91.4% (80.3-96.5) (P=.839). The pooled pCR rate was 41.7% (95% CI 5.4-48.4; I2=.0) for RAS and 19.8% (95%CI 13.3-29.6; I2=.62) for BPS (P=.001), while the MPR was not significantly different (59.6%, versus 48.5%, P=.245). RAS was associated with greater organ preservation and reduced need for mandibulectomy and free-flap reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: RAS following neoadjuvant ICIs in mucosal HNSCC may enable surgical de-escalation with preserved oncologic outcomes and improved function in selected patients. Larger prospective studies are warranted.

Humans

Outcomes of Response-Based Watch-and-Wait and Surgical Management After Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BackgroundTotal neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) increases clinical complete response rates in locally advanced rectal cancer (RC), allowing response-based management strategies such as watch-and-wait (WW) as an alternative to total mesorectal excision (TME). Outcomes associated with WW after TNT remain incompletely defined. This study aimed to compare oncologic and organ-preservation outcomes between WW and surgical management following TNT.MethodsA systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central up to April 2025. Observational studies comparing WW and TME following TNT were included. Pooled odds ratios (ORs), hazard ratios (HRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics. Secondary outcomes included tumor regrowth, salvage surgery, and permanent stoma. Risk of bias was evaluated using ROBINS-I.ResultsSix studies comprising 793 patients were analyzed. WW showed no significant difference compared with TME regarding local recurrence (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.07-26.17; I2 = 80%), distant metastases (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.29-1.33; I2 = 49%), 5-year disease-free survival (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.71-1.31; I2 = 51.7%), or overall survival (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.81-1.30; I2 = 27.9%). Permanent stoma rates were lower with WW (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.01-1.23; I2 = 71%), becoming significant after sensitivity analysis (OR 0.04, 95% CI 0.01-0.19).ConclusionWW after TNT offers oncologic outcomes comparable to TME, with high organ preservation and reduced surgical morbidity in highly selected patients.

Humans

Molecular evaluation of residual disease following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer CALGB 40603 (Alliance).

BACKGROUNDDespite therapeutic advances in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), residual disease (RD) following neoadjuvant therapy remains a key predictor of a worse prognosis and obstacle to improving patient outcomes.METHODSTo better characterize RD and identify survival-associated features, we performed comprehensive transcriptomic profiling of 340 pretreatment stage II/III TNBCs and 70 matched posttreatment RD samples from the randomized CALGB 40603 (Alliance) phase II clinical trial. To explore preclinical treatment strategies for RD, patient-derived xenograft (PDX) mouse models mimicking RD were treated with antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs).RESULTSOur study shows prognostic genomic features measured pretreatment may differ from prognostic features measured posttreatment from RD specimens. Patients with a genomic PAM50 subtype of basal-like in RD specimens had a poor survival outcome, and their matching pretreatment tumors were characterized by elevated chromosomal amplifications of oncogenic drivers and significantly reduced B and T cell expression features. Paired analyses of basal-like RD and matched pretreatment tumors revealed further lymphocyte depletion in RD, along with lower expression of MHC class I and interferon signaling, indicating an immune-cold RD microenvironment. Treatment of a basal-like and conventional chemotherapy-resistant PDX model, resembling basal-like RD, with sacituzumab govitecan or trastuzumab deruxtecan produced a marked antitumor response.CONCLUSIONRD biology differs from pretreatment tumors, with basal-like subtype RD following neoadjuvant chemotherapy being immune cold and associated with poor survival. Preclinical modeling suggests this high-risk group may benefit from adjuvant ADC therapy.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov NCT00861705.FUNDINGNIH NCI U10CA180821 (Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology), NCI U24CA176171 (Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology), NCI UG1CA233373 (Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology), NCI Breast SPORE program P50-CA058223; Susan G. Komen SAC-160074; Breast Cancer Research Foundation BCRF-23-127; NIH NCI R01-CA229409; UNC LCCC Triple Negative Breast Cancer Center.

Humans