Given a favorable tolerability profile, once-daily dosing, and evidence of clinically relevant benefit, letrozole is equivalent to megestrol acetate and should be considered for use as an alternative treatment of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women after treatment failure with antiestrogens.

Introduction: Objective measurements of levels of physical activity and fitness in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) are lacking. Furthermore, demographic, clinical and lifestyle-related correlates of low levels of physical activity and fitness in patients with HNC are unknown. This study aims to investigate the levels of accelerometer that assessed physical activity and fitness in patients with HNC and to identify their demographical, clinical and lifestyle-related correlates. Methods: Two hundred and fifty-four patients who were recently diagnosed with HNC and participated in the NETherlands QUality of life and Biomedical cohort studies In head and neck Cancer (NET-QUBIC) study were included. Physical activity (accelerometer), cardiorespiratory fitness (Chester Step Test), hand grip strength (hand dynamometer) and lower body muscle function (30-second chair-stand test) were assessed. Multivariable linear regression analyses with a stepwise forward selection procedure were used. Results: Patients spent 229 min/d in physical activity of which 18 min/d in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. The mean predicted VO 2 max was 27.9 ml/kg/min, the mean hand grip strength was 38.1 kg and the mean number of standings was 14.3. Patients with lower educational level, more comorbidity and higher tumor stage spent significantly less time in physical activity. Older patients, females and patients with a higher tumor stage had significantly lower cardiorespiratory fitness levels. Older patients, females, patients with more comorbidity, patients with normal weight and patients who have never smoked had significantly lower hand grip strength. Older patients, patients with lower educational level, smokers and patients with more comorbidity had a significantly lower function of lower body muscle. Conclusions: Pre-treatment levels of physical activity, cardiorespiratory fitness and lower body muscle function are low in patients with HNC. Based on this study, exercise programs targeted and tailored to patients with low levels of physical activity and fitness can be developed.

BackgroundA patient’s physical function plays a leading role in the treatment prescription for patients with cancer. Objective assessments of physical function may be more predictive for treatment tolerability and survival than frequently used subjective measures, such as the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group/World Health Organization (ECOG/WHO) performance score. The use of smartphones to measure physical activity and fitness may provide an excellent opportunity to objectively estimate a patient’s physical function against low costs and little time. We investigated feasibility, validity and reliability of smartphone measurements of step count and physical fitness in patients with cancer.MethodsIn total, 72 patients participated. They wore a smartphone for 14 days to measure the mean number of steps per day, concomitant with an accelerometer during the first 7 days. Patients performed a six-minute walk test (6MWT) twice outdoors via a smartphone application and once in a test environment in the hospital. Feasibility was evaluated by the proportion of patients who completed the study as well as smartphone assessments of step count and physical fitness. Validity was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between the accelerometer and the first week of the smartphone for step count, and between the 6MWT in the hospital and via the application for physical fitness. Test-retest reliability was assessed with the ICC between step count levels of the first and second week of smartphone assessments, and between the first and second six-minute walk test in the home environment.ResultsThe completeness of smartphone measurements was approximately 90% for step count and 64% for physical fitness assessments. Validity was excellent for step count (ICC = 0.97, p < 0.001) and fair for fitness (ICC = 0.47, p < 0.001). We found excellent test-retest reliability for step count (ICC = 0.91, p < 0.001) and physical fitness (ICC = 0.88, p < 0.001).ConclusionsThis study showed that objective smartphone measurements of step count in clinical practice are feasible, valid and reliable. These findings indicate that the use of smartphones to objectively assess physical activity in clinical cancer practice is promising and may be used to select patients for treatment and study participation, to monitor patients during treatment and to guide treatment decisions.

Purpose The level of daily physical activity in patients with cancer is frequently assessed by questionnaires, such as the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE). Objective assessments, with for example accelerometers, may be a good alternative. The aim of this study was to investigate the agreement between the PASE questionnaire and accelerometer-assessed physical activity in a large group of patients with different types of cancer. Methods Baseline accelerometer and PASE questionnaire data of 403 participants from the REACT (Resistance and Endurance Exercise After Chemotherapy, n = 227), the EXIST (Exercise Intervention After Stem-Cell Transplantation, n = 74), and NET-QUBIC (NEtherlands QUality of Life And Biomedical Cohort Studies In Cancer, n = 102) studies were available for the current analyses. Physical activity was assessed by the PASE questionnaire (total score) and accelerometers (total minutes per day > 100 counts). Linear mixed models regression analysis was used to assess the agreement between the PASE questionnaire and accelerometer-assessed physical activity. Results The mean (SD) PASE score was 95.9 (75.1) points and mean (SD) time in physical activity measured with the accelerometer was 256.6 (78.8) min per day. The agreement between the PASE score and the accelerometer data was significant, but poor (standardized regression coefficient (B) = 0.36, 95%CI = 0.27; 0.44, p < 0.01).