Kathryn H. Schmitz, PhD, MPH, FACSM Kerry S. Courneya, PhD Charles Matthews, PhD, FACSM Wendy Demark-Wahnefried, PhD Daniel A. Galvão, PhD Bernardine M. Pinto, PhD Melinda L. Irwin, PhD, FACSM Kathleen Y. Wolin, ScD, FACSM Roanne J. Segal, MD, FRCP Alejandro Lucia, MD, PhD Carole M. Schneider, PhD, FACSM Vivian E. von Gruenigen, MD Anna L. Schwartz, PhD, FAAN Early detection and improved treatments for cancer have resulted in roughly 12 million survivors alive in the United States today. This growing population faces unique challenges from their disease and treatments, including risk for recurrent cancer, other chronic diseases, and persistent adverse effects on physical functioning and quality of life. Historically, clinicians advised cancer patients to rest and to avoid activity; however, emerging research on exercise has challenged this recommendation. To this end, a roundtable was convened by American College of Sports Medicine to distill the literature on the safety and efficacy of exercise training during and after adjuvant cancer therapy and to provide guidelines. The roundtable concluded that exercise training is safe during and after cancer treatments and results in improvements in physical functioning, quality of life, and cancer-related fatigue in several cancer survivor groups. Implications for disease outcomes and survival are still unknown. Nevertheless, the benefits to physical functioning and quality of life are sufficient for the recommendation that cancer survivors follow the 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans, with specific exercise programming adaptations based on disease and treatment-related adverse effects. The advice to "avoid inactivity," even in cancer patients with existing disease or undergoing difficult treatments, is likely helpful.

Multiple organizations around the world have issued evidence‐based exercise guidance for patients with cancer and cancer survivors. Recently, the American College of Sports Medicine has updated its exercise guidance for cancer prevention as well as for the prevention and treatment of a variety of cancer health‐related outcomes (eg, fatigue, anxiety, depression, function, and quality of life). Despite these guidelines, the majority of people living with and beyond cancer are not regularly physically active. Among the reasons for this is a lack of clarity on the part of those who work in oncology clinical settings of their role in assessing, advising, and referring patients to exercise. The authors propose using the American College of Sports Medicine's Exercise Is Medicine initiative to address this practice gap. The simple proposal is for clinicians to assess, advise, and refer patients to either home‐based or community‐based exercise or for further evaluation and intervention in outpatient rehabilitation. To do this will require care coordination with appropriate professionals as well as change in the behaviors of clinicians, patients, and those who deliver the rehabilitation and exercise programming. Behavior change is one of many challenges to enacting the proposed practice changes. Other implementation challenges include capacity for triage and referral, the need for a program registry, costs and compensation, and workforce development. In conclusion, there is a call to action for key stakeholders to create the infrastructure and cultural adaptations needed so that all people living with and beyond cancer can be as active as is possible for them.

The combination of an increasing number of new cancer cases and improving survival rates has led to a large and rapidly growing population with unique health-care requirements. Exercise has been proposed as a strategy to help address the issues faced by cancer patients. Supported by a growing body of research, major health organizations commonly identify the importance of incorporating exercise in cancer care and advise patients to be physically active. This systematic review comprehensively summarizes the available epidemiologic and randomized controlled trial evidence investigating the role of exercise in the management of cancer. Literature searches focused on determining the potential impact of exercise on 1) cancer mortality and recurrence and 2) adverse effects of cancer and its treatment. A total of 100 studies were reviewed involving thousands of individual patients whose exercise behavior was assessed following the diagnosis of any type of cancer. Compared with patients who performed no/less exercise, patients who exercised following a diagnosis of cancer were observed to have a lower relative risk of cancer mortality and recurrence and experienced fewer/less severe adverse effects. The findings of this review support the view that exercise is an important adjunct therapy in the management of cancer. Implications on cancer care policy and practice are discussed.

This individual patient data meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of exercise on quality of life (QoL) and physical function (PF) in patients with cancer, and to identify moderator effects of demographic (age, sex, marital status, education), clinical (body mass index, cancer type, presence of metastasis), intervention-related (intervention timing, delivery mode and duration, and type of control group), and exercise-related (exercise frequency, intensity, type, time) characteristics. Relevant published and unpublished studies were identified in September 2012 via PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL, reference checking and personal communications. Principle investigators of all 69 eligible trials were requested to share IPD from their study. IPD from 34 randomised controlled trials (n=4519 patients) that evaluated the effects of exercise compared to a usual care, wait-list or attention control group on QoL and PF in adult patients with cancer were retrieved and pooled. Linear mixed-effect models were used to evaluate the effects of the exercise on post-intervention outcome values (z-score) adjusting for baseline values. Moderator effects were studies by testing interactions. Exercise significantly improved QoL (β=0.15, 95%CI=0.10;0.20) and PF (β=0.18, 95%CI=0.13;0.23). The effects were not moderated by demographic, clinical or exercise characteristics. Effects on QoL (βdifference_in_effect=0.13, 95%CI=0.03;0.22) and PF (βdifference_in_effect=0.10, 95%CI=0.01;0.20) were significantly larger for supervised than unsupervised interventions. In conclusion, exercise, and particularly supervised exercise, effectively improves QoL and PF in patients with cancer with different demographic and clinical characteristics during and following treatment. Although effect sizes are small, there is consistent empirical evidence to support implementation of exercise as part of cancer care.

Weight lifting has generally been proscribed for women with breast-cancer–related lymphedema, preventing them from obtaining the well-established health benefits of weight lifting, including increases in bone density.