Massage therapy is a common postexercise muscle recovery modality; however, its mechanisms of efficacy are uncertain. We evaluated the effects of massage on systemic inflammatory responses to exercise and postexercise muscle performance and soreness. In this crossover study, nine healthy male athletes completed a high-intensity intermittent sprint protocol, followed by massage therapy or control condition. Inflammatory markers were assessed pre-exercise; postexercise; and at 1, 2, and 24 h postexercise. Muscle performance was measured by squat and drop jump, and muscle soreness on a Likert scale. Significant time effects were observed for monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), interleukin-8 (IL-8), interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-10 (IL-10), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), drop jump performance, squat jump performance, and soreness. No significant effects for condition were observed. However, compared with control, inflammatory marker concentrations (IL-8, TNFα, and MCP-1) returned to baseline levels earlier following the massage therapy condition (p < 0.05 for all). IL-6 returned to baseline levels earlier following the control versus massage therapy condition (p < 0.05). No differences were observed for performance or soreness variables. MCP-1 area under the curve (AUC) was negatively associated with squat and drop jump performance, while IL-10 AUC was positively associated with drop jump performance (p < 0.05 for all). In conclusion, massage therapy promotes resolution of systemic inflammatory signaling following exercise but does not appear to improve performance or soreness measurements.

Stress is a ubiquitous experience that can be adaptive or maladaptive. Physiological stress regulation, or allostasis, can be disrupted at any point along the regulatory pathway resulting in adverse effects for the individual. Children with cancer exhibit significant changes to these pathways in line with stress dysregulation and long-term effects similar to those observed in other early-life stress populations, which are thought to be, in part, a result of cytotoxic cancer treatments. Children with cancer may have disruption to several steps in the stress-regulatory pathway including cognitive-affective function, neurological disruption to stress regulatory brain regions, altered adrenal and endocrine function, and disrupted tissue integrity, as well as lower engagement in positive coping behaviours such as physical activity and pro-social habits. To date, there has been minimal study of stress reactivity patterns in childhood illness populations. Nor has the role of stress regulation in long-term health and function been elucidated. We conclude that consideration of stress regulation in childhood cancer may be crucial in understanding and treating the disease.