Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer‐related death worldwide. Affected patients frequently experience debilitating disease‐related symptoms, including dyspnea, cough, fatigue, anxiety, depression, insomnia, and pain, despite the progresses achieved in term of treatment efficacy. Physical activity and exercise are nonpharmacological interventions that have been shown to improve fatigue, quality of life, cardiorespiratory fitness, pulmonary function, muscle mass and strength, and psychological status in patients with lung cancer. Moreover, physical fitness levels, especially cardiorespiratory endurance and muscular strength, are demonstrated to be independent predictors of survival. Nevertheless, patients with lung cancer frequently present insufficient levels of physical activity and exercise, and these may contribute to quality of life impairment, reduction in functional capacity with skeletal muscle atrophy or weakness, and worsening of symptoms, particularly dyspnea. The molecular bases underlying the potential impact of exercise on the fitness and treatment outcome of patients with lung cancer are still elusive. Counteracting specific cancer cells’ acquired capabilities (hallmarks of cancer), together with preventing treatment‐induced adverse events, represent main candidate mechanisms. To date, the potential impact of physical activity and exercise in lung cancer remains to be fully appreciated, and no specific exercise guidelines for patients with lung cancer are available. In this article, we perform an in‐depth review of the evidence supporting physical activity and exercise in lung cancer and suggest that integrating this kind of intervention within the framework of a global, multidimensional approach, taking into account also nutritional and psychological aspects, might be the most effective strategy. Implications for Practice Although growing evidence supports the safety and efficacy of exercise in lung cancer, both after surgery and during and after medical treatments, most patients are insufficiently active or sedentary. Engaging in exercise programs is particularly arduous for patients with lung cancer, mainly because of a series of physical and psychosocial disease‐related barriers (including the smoking stigma). A continuous collaboration among oncologists and cancer exercise specialists is urgently needed in order to develop tailored programs based on patients’ needs, preferences, and physical and psychological status. In this regard, benefit of exercise appears to be potentially enhanced when administered as a multidimensional, comprehensive approach to patients’ well‐being.

Background: Despite the benefits related to physical exercise, large numbers of cancer patients are not sufficiently active. Methods: To investigate exercise levels and preferences in cancer patients, a cross-sectional study was conducted on a random sample of 392 cancer outpatients who anonymously completed a questionnaire investigating general and medical characteristics, and expressed willingness to participate in exercise programs. Current exercise levels were estimated with the Leisure Score Index (LSI). Results: Most patients (93%) were insufficiently active but 80% declared an interest in exercise programs. Patients preferred oncologist-instructed programs and specified particular exercise needs. Multivariate logistic regression showed that willingness to exercise was associated with education (OR: 1.87; 95% CI: 1.15–3.04 beyond age 14 years vs. up to 14 years) and current physical activity (OR: 1.92; 95% CI: 1.92–3.63 for sweat-inducing activity >2 times/week vs. <1 time/week). Patients given chemotherapy were less inclined to exercise (OR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.23–0.86) than those who did not. LSI was lower if cancer stage was advanced (β: -0.36; 95% CI: −0.75 to −0.02) than if it was in remission. High LSI was also associated with longer education, lower BMI, and longer time after diagnosis. Conclusion: Cancer patients are insufficiently active but are willing to participate in personalized exercise programs. Information from this survey may help in designing personalized interventions so these patients will achieve sufficient exercise.

No abstract

The psychological impact of the Covid 19 pandemic on cancer patients, a population at higher risk of fatal consequences if infected, has been only rarely evaluated. This study was conducted at the Departments of Oncology of four hospitals located in the Verona area in Italy to investigate the psychological consequences of the pandemic on cancer patients under active anticancer treatments. A 13-item ad hoc questionnaire to evaluate the psychological status of patients before and during the pandemic was administered to 474 consecutive subjects in the time frame between April 27th and June 7th 2020. Among the 13 questions, 7 were considered appropriate to elaborate an Emotional Vulnerability Index (EVI) that allows to separate the population in two groups (low versus high emotional vulnerability) according to observed median values. During the emergency period, the feeling of high vulnerability was found in 246 patients (53%) and was significantly associated with the following clinical variables: female gender, being under chemotherapy treatment, age ≤ 65 years. Compared to the pre-pandemic phase, the feeling of vulnerability was increased in 41 patients (9%), remained stably high in 196 (42%) and, surprisingly, was reduced in 10 patients (2%). Overall, in a population characterized by an high level of emotional vulnerability the pandemic had a marginal impact and only a small proportion of patients reported an increase of their emotional vulnerability.

Introduction: Although the literature supports the importance of physical activity in the oncological context, in Italy a large number of patients are not sufficiently active. Methods: The present study aimed to explore factors influencing an active lifestyle in cancer patients during oncological treatments. Semi-structured focus groups, including 18 patients with different cancer types, were conducted at the Oncology Unit in the University Hospital Trust of Verona (Italy). The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed with content analysis. Results: According to the Health Belief Model, transcripts were categorized into the following themes: benefits, barriers, and cues to action. Patients reported a series of physical, physiological, and psychological benefits deriving from an active lifestyle. The main barriers hampering the physical activity participation were represented by treatment-related side effects, advanced disease, and some medical procedures, for example, ileostomy. Several strategies that can trigger patients to exercise were identified. Medical advice, social support from family and friends, features such as enjoyment, setting goals, and owning an animal can motivate patients to perform physical activity. At the same time, an individualized program based on patients’ characteristics, an available physical activity specialist to consult, more detailed information regarding physical activity in the oncological setting, and having accessible structures were found important facilitators to implementing active behavior. Conclusions: Overall, patients have a positive view regarding physical activity, and a variety of obstacles and cues to action were recognized. Considering this information may help to improve adherence to a physical activity program over time, consequently increasing the expected benefits.