Prehabilitation in Thoracic Cancer Surgery: From Research to Standard of Care

High-Intensity Interval Training for Cancer Patients: A Review of Key Considerations for Exercise Prescription

BACKGROUND

High-intensity interval training (HIIT) performed before, during, and after cancer treatment can attenuate the adverse effects induced by anti-cancer drugs. A clear presentation and rationale of characteristics of HIIT variables is vital to produce the expected HIIT adaptations in cancer patients. However, there are concerns regarding the HIIT protocols used in the cancer literature.

OBJECTIVES

The aims were to (1) identify the characteristics of HIIT and the formats that have been prescribed, (2) analyze which anchors have been utilized to prescribe effort and pause intensity, (3) examine characteristics of the physical tests used for HIIT prescription, and (4) identify potential adverse events related to HIIT intervention.

METHODS

This scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases.

RESULTS

A total of 51 studies were retrieved, and the following results were found: (1) Only 25 studies reported all four essential variables for HIIT prescription [effort intensity (effort duration): pause intensity (pause duration)]. Of these studies, 23 used active pause and employed the following prescription (on average): [84% (116 s): 39% (118 s)] when percentage of maximal aerobic power (MAP) [maximal/peak oxygen uptake ( V O2max/peak)/MAP] was used; [124% (161 s): 55% (142 s)] when percentage of anaerobic threshold (AT) was used; [83% (230 s): 62% (165 s)] when maximal heart rate percentage (%HRmax) was used. From these 23 studies, 12 used V O2max/peak/MAP (one of the most recommended variables for HIIT prescription). Seven studies adopted the HIIT-long format, and in the remaining five studies, the format was unclear. (2) Twenty-four studies used fractions of V O2max/peak or mechanical variables like MAP as anchors for prescribing effort intensity, two studies used AT, 20 studies used fractions of HRmax/heart rate reserve, two studies used rate of perceived exertion (RPE), while one used RPE and % V O2peak concomitantly, and two studies utilized RPE/%HRmax concomitantly. Two studies utilized passive resting, 12 studies used % V O2peak/%MAP for prescribing pause intensity, four studies used AT, seven studies used %HRmax, one study used %HRmax/% V O2peak, and two studies used absolute loads. (3) Ten studies did not report the characteristics of the physical tests employed, two studies used submaximal tests, and 39 studies utilized graded exercise tests. (4) Ten studies did not report if there were adverse events associated with the exercise program, while 34 studies did not report any adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Only 50% of the studies provided all the necessary variables for accurate HIIT prescription, raising concerns about the replicability, comprehension, and effective application of HIIT in cancer patients. Most of the studies that reported all variables appeared to have employed the HIIT-long format. Only a few studies used more individualized anchors (e.g., AT) to prescribe HIIT-long format for cancer patients, which is considered a very heterogeneous population.

Perioperative Immunotherapy for Node-Negative Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer-Current Evidence and Future Directions

Neoadjuvant immunotherapy has gone from an idea to an indication in locally advanced lung cancer. Several phase III trials have demonstrated the superiority of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy compared with chemotherapy in this setting. Although such progress has revolutionized the treatment of locally advanced disease, the unmet needs of stage I and stage II patients without lymph node disease have largely been underrepresented in existing trials. Up-front resection with few patients going on to complete adjuvant therapy remains the norm for most stage I and II patients. Emerging evidence now supports the exploration of supplemental checkpoint blockade in well-selected early-stage, node-negative patients with large tumors and no actionable driver mutations. Although concerns surrounding safety and risk exist, patient selection could be substantially improved using novel biomarker approaches that leverage our understanding of the tumor immune microenvironment of lung cancer. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the opportunities and controversies of perioperative immunotherapy in node-negative lung cancer.

Predicting short-term treatment toxicity in head and neck cancer through a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Frailty is a recognized condition associated with poorer outcomes in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). The objective of this study was to ascertain the prognostic significance of various frailty metrics on short-term treatment toxicity in patients with HNC undergoing curative-intent therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was performed searching multiple databases. An inverse-variation, random-effects model was used to perform the meta-analysis to evaluate the prognostic significance of various frailty metrics on short-term treatment-related toxicity in this population.

RESULTS

A total of 292,560 patients with HNC originating from 36 observational studies were analyzed. The most frequently reported frailty metrics were the modified frailty index (mFI), Geriatric 8 questionnaire (G8), Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG), Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI), and comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). The overall prevalence of frailty using any metric in all included studies was 7.5 %. The combined odds ratio (OR) for short-term treatment toxicity using the mFI was 2.60 (95 % CI of 1.81-3.72), G8 2.69 (95 % CI 1.37-5.28), ACG 3.43 (95 %CI 2.52-4.67), GFI 2.71 (95 % CI 1.11-6.62), and CGA 3.36 (95 % CI 1.18-9.53). The association of frailty with short-term treatment toxicity using various frailty metrics was more pronounced in patients with upfront surgery (OR 3.00, 95 %CI of 2.35-3.81) compared to definitive (chemo)radiotherapy 2.64 (95 % CI 1.04-6.68).

DISCUSSION

Various frailty metrics exists in the HNC literature, with the most common being the mFI, G8, ACG, GFI, and CGA. Patients with HNC and frailty are more than twice as likely to suffer a short-term treatment-related toxicity when undergoing curative-intent HNC treatment than patients without frailty. This effect is more pronounced in patients undergoing upfront surgery.

Summary of the best evidence for prehabilitation management of patients with non-small cell lung cancer

Objective

This study adopts an evidence-based methodology to establish a comprehensive theory foundation for preoperative prehabilitation management in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

Methods

A systematic literature review linked to prehabilitation management for NSCLC patients was conducted, utilizing reputable databases such as UpToDate, BMJ Best Practice, UK NICE, SIGN, GIN, Joanna Briggs Institute Library, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, OVID evidence-based database, PubMed, Chinese Wanfang database, CNKI, CBM, ATS, BTS, AACVPR, and EACTS. The search encompassed articles, including clinical decision-making, guidelines, evidence summaries, expert consensuses, and systematic reviews, from the inception of databases up to March 31st, 2023. Two researchers performed quality assessment of the literature and subsequent evidence extraction.

Results

Nineteen articles were included, comprising five guidelines, three expert consensuses, seven systematic reviews, and four randomized controlled trials. A total of 41 pieces of evidence were summarized, addressing key aspects such as the multidisciplinary team, appropriate patient population, prehabilitation modes, timing of prehabilitation, prehabilitation assessment, prehabilitation content, quality control, and effectiveness evaluation.

Conclusions

The synthesis of the best evidence for prehabilitation management in NSCLC patients provides a solid evidence-based foundation for its implementation. It is recommended that healthcare professionals conduct thorough patient evaluations, optimize and integrate medical resources, and collaboratively engage in interdisciplinarity efforts to develop and implement personalized and multimodal prehabilitation plans.

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

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review is to better understand access to, acceptance of and adherence to cancer prehabilitation.

METHODS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited empirical research of barriers and facilitators to inform improvement in equity of access to cancer prehabilitation.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

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.

Barriers and facilitators to smartwatch-based prehabilitation participation among frail surgery patients: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

For older, frail adults, exercise before surgery through prehabilitation (prehab) may hasten return recovery and reduce postoperative complications. We developed a smartwatch-based prehab program (BeFitMe) for older adults that encourages and tracks at-home exercise. The objective of this study was to assess patient perceptions about facilitators and barriers to prehab generally and to using a smartwatch prehab program among older adult thoracic surgery patients to optimize future program implementation.

METHODS

We recruited patients, aged ≥50 years who had or were having surgery and were screened for frailty (Fried's Frailty Phenotype) at a thoracic surgery clinic at a single academic institution. Semi-structured interviews were conducted by telephone after obtaining informed consent. Participants were given a description of the BeFitMe program. The interview questions were informed by The Five "Rights" of Clinical Decision-Making framework (Information, Person, Time, Channel, and Format) and sought to identify the factors perceived to influence smartwatch prehab program participation. Interview transcripts were transcribed and independently coded to identify themes in for each of the Five "Rights" domains.

RESULTS

A total of 29 interviews were conducted. Participants were 52% men (n = 15), 48% Black (n = 14), and 59% pre-frail (n = 11) or frail (n = 6) with a mean age of 68 ± 9 years. Eleven total themes emerged. Facilitator themes included the importance of providers (right person) clearly explaining the significance of prehab (right information) during the preoperative visit (right time); providing written instructions and exercise prescriptions; and providing a preprogrammed and set-up (right format) Apple Watch (right channel). Barrier themes included pre-existing conditions and disinterest in exercise and/or technology. Participants provided suggestions to overcome the technology barrier, which included individualized training and support on usage and responsibilities.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reports the perceived facilitators and barriers to a smartwatch-based prehab program for pre-frail and frail thoracic surgery patients. The future BeFitMe implementation protocol must ensure surgical providers emphasize the beneficial impact of participating in prehab before surgery and provide a written prehab prescription; must include a thorough guide on smartwatch use along with the preprogrammed device to be successful. The findings are relevant to other smartwatch-based interventions for older adults.

Recommendations on the use of prehabilitation, i.e. comprehensive preparation of the patient for surgery

Prehabilitation is a comprehensive preparation of a patient for primarily surgical treatments. Its aim is to improve the patient'sgeneral condition so as to reduce the risk of complications and ensure the fastest possible recovery to full health. Thebasic components of prehabilitation include: improvement of nutritional status, appropriate exercises to improve functioning,psychological support, and help in eliminating addictions. Other important aspects of prehabilitation are: increasinghemoglobin levels in patients with anemia, achieving good glycemic control in patients with diabetes, treatment or stabilizationof any concurrent disorders, or specialist treatment associated with a specific procedure (endoprostheses, ostomyprocedure). This article organizes and outlines the indications for prehabilitation, its scope, duration, and the method to conductit. Experts of various specialties related to prehabilitation agree that it should be an element of surgery preparationwhenever possible, especially in patients with co-existing medical conditions who have been qualified for major procedures.Prehabilitation should be carried out by interdisciplinary teams, including family physicians and various specialists in thetreatment of comorbidities. Prehabilitation requires urgent systemic and reimbursement solutions.

Prehabilitation in the lung cancer pathway: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Lung 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.

METHODS

A 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.

RESULTS

In 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.

CONCLUSION

A 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.

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

BACKGROUND

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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].

CONCLUSION

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.

Application and practice of trimodal prehabilitation model in preoperative management of patients with lung cancer undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery

Lung cancer is one of the malignant tumors with high mortality worldwide. To date, the most effective treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is still surgical resection. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery has become the main surgical approach. Tumor patients are the high-risk perioperative population. At present, how to optimize perioperative management measures to improve the patient's body function and promote the rehabilitation after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery is a hot research topic for medical staff. In this study, 148 patients with lung cancer were selected as the research object, to analyze and discuss the application value of trimodal prehabilitation model in preoperative management of patients with lung cancer undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.

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.

Anesthetic Management for Pulmonary Resection: Current Concepts and Improving Safety of Anesthesia

Increasingly complex procedures are routinely performed using minimally invasive approaches, allowing cancers to be resected with short hospital stays, minimal postsurgical discomfort, and improved odds of cancer-free survival. Along with these changes, the focus of anesthetic management for lung resection surgery has expanded from the provision of ideal surgical conditions and safe intraoperative patient care to include preoperative patient training and optimization and postoperative pain management techniques that can impact pulmonary outcomes as well as patient lengths of stay.