Skip to main content
Download PDF

EffEx-HN trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial on the EFFectiveness and feasibility of a comprehensive supervised EXercise program during radiotherapy in Head and Neck cancer patients on health-related quality of life

Trials volume 24, Article number: 276 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

With over 500,000 annually reported cases worldwide, head and neck cancer (HNC) is the seventh most common type of cancer worldwide. Treatment of HNC with chemoradiotherapy frequently results in serious impairments in physical and psychosocial functioning. Besides, HNC patients typically start their cancer treatment already with poor physical and psychosocial health. It has been shown that a sufficient level of physical activity (PA) before, during, and after cancer treatment is associated with fewer negative treatment-related side effects and a better quality of life (QOL). In order to prevent worsening of functioning and limit the physical impact of the HNC treatment, a comprehensive supervised exercise program (CSEP) may be beneficial during early cancer treatment. However, up to now, the feasibility and effectiveness of such a program are not yet investigated thoroughly in HNC. Therefore, the primary objective of this study is to examine the effectiveness of a CSEP during HNC treatment, in addition to usual supportive care, compared to usual supportive care alone, on health-related QOL up to 1 year post-diagnosis. Secondary objectives entail gathering information on (1) the effectiveness of a CSEP on secondary outcomes such as physical and mental function, activities of daily life, and participation in society and (2) the feasibility, possible barriers, and facilitators for participation in a CSEP during HNC treatment.

Methods

To investigate the effectiveness of the CSEP, a parallel, open-label randomized controlled trial will be performed. To study the feasibility of the CSEP, a mixed-method study will be performed in a subgroup of participants. HNC patients are eligible if they receive radiotherapy at the Radiation-Oncology department of the University Hospital of Leuven. A 4-size permuted block randomization will be used. The control group receives the current standard of supportive care. The intervention group receives a CSEP, additional to the same usual supportive care. The CSEP consists of a 12-week intensive phase with 3 exercise sessions of 1 h per week, where supervision is gradually reduced after 6 weeks. During the maintenance phase (from week 13), patients exercise at home with monthly tele-consultations with a physiotherapist. The CSEP contains supervised aerobic and resistance training. In both groups, outcomes of interest are evaluated through self-reported questionnaires and clinical assessments, at baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months post-diagnosis. The primary endpoint is health-related QOL, measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 at 6 months post-diagnosis.

Discussion

The study will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. This protocol has been approved by the ethical committee of the University Hospitals Leuven (s65549). Recruitment started in January 2022. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed scientific journals and presentations at congresses.

Trial registration

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov

Identifier: NCT05256238

Date of registration: February 25, 2022

Peer Review reports

Administrative information

Title

EffEx-HN Trial: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial on the effectiveness and feasibility of a comprehensive supervised exercise program (CSEP) during radiotherapy in head and neck cancer patients on health-related quality of life

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov

Identifier: NCT05256238

February 25 2022

Protocol version

Version 2.2 January 20, 2022

Funding

Kom Op Tegen Kanker

Author details

sandra.nuyts@uzleuven.be

 + 32 16 347 600

an.degroef@kuleuven.be

 + 32 16 342 171

kaat.vanaperen@kuleuven.be

 + 32 16 345 196

Name and contact information for the trial sponsor

University Hospitals Leuven

Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, België

 + 32 16 33 22 11

Role of sponsor

The study is conducted at the University Hospitals Leuven

Introduction

Background and rationale

With over 500,000 annually reported new cases worldwide, head and neck cancer (HNC) is the seventh most common type of cancer worldwide [1, 2]. HNC contains a diverse group of malignancies originating from the mucosa in the oral cavity, nasopharynx, oropharynx, hypopharynx and larynx. Unfortunately, the majority of patients with HNC have locally advanced disease at diagnosis and are, therefore, treated with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or with radical surgery followed by adjuvant (C)RT. Treatment of HNCs with (C)RT frequently results in serious and persistent impairments in physical and psychosocial functioning [3, 4].

The WHO International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) model offers a framework for understanding disability and health, e.g., during and after HNC [5]. At function level of the ICF, swallowing and speech impairments are specific morbidities experienced in over half of HNC patients at various intensities before, during, and after cancer treatment [3]. Additionally, a large part of HNC patients experience lymphedema, pain, stiffness, and/or weakness of the jaw, neck, and shoulder [3, 4]. These local impairments are mainly caused by radiotherapy-induced fibrosis and neck dissection surgery. All this contributes to activity limitations in neck and shoulder function in about two thirds of HNC patients [3, 4]. More general consequence including fatigue, decreased physical fitness, muscle wasting, and related weight loss are other activity limitations [4,5,6]. These impairments restrict physical functioning and participation in activities of daily living of many patients, consequently impeding their quality of life [6]. Besides the physical and psychosocial consequences of the cancer treatment, HNC patients typically start their cancer treatment already with poor physical and psychosocial health, compared to healthy controls, and hence, QOL is already impaired prior to starting any intervention [6, 7].

The awareness on the importance of exercise therapy for management of the side effects at the different levels of the ICF during and after cancer treatment in general is increasing rapidly [6,7,8,9]. It has been shown that a sufficient level of physical activity before, during, and after cancer treatment is associated with a better prognosis, a lower risk of recurrence, a lower risk of mortality [7,8,9,10], fewer negative treatment-related side effects [9], and a better quality of life [8,9,10,11]. At this moment, the guidelines of the American College of Sports Medicine recommend 2- or 3-weekly 20–30 min sessions of moderate aerobic exercise plus 2-weekly resistance training at moderate to vigorous intensity (2 sets of 8–15 repetitions at > 60% of the 1 repetition maximum for major muscle groups) to have effect of exercise on health-related quality of life in cancer populations. These guidelines are based on research in mostly breast, prostate, and colon cancer populations as these are the most prevalent populations [8,9,10].

Up to now, it has not yet been investigated properly whether these general guidelines for exercise programs are translatable to the HNC population. Given the specific physical and psychosocial needs in the HNC population described above, this should be investigated properly [6,7,8,9]. In addition, since HNC patients often start their treatment already with poor physical functioning [6], exercise therapy should be initiated at time of diagnosis and continue during and after treatment. In the currently available studies, the outcomes and the content of the exercise programs are very heterogeneous making it difficult to draw conclusions at this moment [8,9,10,11]. First, in a pilot study of Zhao S.G. et al. from 2016, HNC patients undergoing concurrent CRT and participating in a program designed to maintain physical activity during cancer treatment maintained or improved function and QOL. They also concluded that the exercise intervention was feasible, thereby providing the basis for larger future interventions with longer follow-up [12]. Second, a study of Samuel et al. (2019) showed that an 11-week structured exercise program for HNC patients receiving CRT helps in improving their functional capacity and quality of life up to 11 weeks after diagnosis [13]. The exercise program consisted of 5 trainings per week, with 7 weeks in the hospital and 4 weeks of home-based trainings. Limitations of this study are that there was no maintenance program and no follow-up period after the 11 weeks.

In addition, next to the effectiveness of an exercise program on different health-related outcomes, barriers and facilitators for participating in a CSEP starting from diagnosis should be properly investigated. In the trial of Samuel et al., patients attend 75% of the prescribed sessions [14]. Unfortunately, specific barriers and facilitators or reasons for non-adhering were not studied. Possibly, the intense schedule of 5 trainings per week may have decreased adherence in that study. Also, it may be interesting to explore whether the combination of in hospital with home-based trainings is more beneficial. Travel time to the hospital is indeed a barrier to exercise, which confirms the need of combining hospital and home-based exercise programs [14].

Given this, a comprehensive supervised exercise program (CSEP) starting early during CRT may be beneficial to prevent worsening of a person’s functioning and limit the physical impact of the treatments for HNC [6,7,8,9]. Such a program should consist of a combination of aerobic training, progressive resistance training for all major muscle groups and stretching exercises, in particular in the upper limb region. The program should combine in hospital training with home-based trainings and have a sufficiently long duration.

Objectives

There is a need to improve the integration of exercise programs into HNC care. The aim is to help HNC patients to prevent decline in and restore physical, mental and social functioning. Currently, no strong evidence is available for a program adapted to the specific needs of HNC patients, in particular during cancer treatment [3, 4, 6]. The primary objective is to examine the effectiveness of a CSEP, in addition to usual supportive care, on health-related quality of life during the treatment of HNC, compared to usual supportive care alone, up to 1 year after diagnosis. This will be performed through an open-label randomized controlled trial.

Secondary objectives entail gathering information on the effectiveness of the CSEP, in addition to usual supportive care on secondary outcome parameters including physical and mental functioning, activity level, and participation level of the ICF. In addition, the feasibility of such CSEP as well as possible barriers and facilitators for participating in a CSEP during HNC treatment will be studied.

Trial design

A parallel, two-arm, open label trial will be conducted. This single center prospective randomized clinical study will be performed to investigate the effectiveness and the feasibility of a comprehensive supervised exercise program (CSEP) in addition to usual supportive care compared to usual supportive care alone in patients undergoing CRT for HNC, the EffEx-HN trial. This is a superiority trial design because we aim to investigate whether a CSEP is more effective in improving health-related quality of life than the current standard of supportive care. To study the feasibility of the CSEP, a qualitative study will be performed in a subgroup of participants of the large prospective randomized clinical study described above. Quantitative data on feasibility will be collected in all participants.

Methods: participants, interventions, and outcomes

The SPIRIT guidelines were used [15].

The recruitment of the clinical trial started in January 2022 at the department of Radiation-Oncology of the University Hospitals in Leuven (Belgium). The supervised exercise sessions of the intervention group take place in the exercise room of the department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation of the University Hospitals in Leuven (Belgium). A flowchart of the EffEx-HN Trial is provided in Table 1.

Table 1 Trial flowchart: enrolment, intervention, and assessments of the EffEx-HN trial
Full size table

Patient and public involvement in trial design

The protocol was submitted and approved by the patient support group of HNC patients of the University Hospitals Leuven.

Eligibility criteria

HNC patients are eligible to participate if they are scheduled for radiotherapy at the Radiation-Oncology department of the University Hospitals Leuven. Inclusion criteria are as follows: (1) ≥ 18 years, (2) diagnosed with primary malignant tumor head and neck region, (3) ECOG performance score 0–1, (4) able to complete baseline assessments prior to start of (chemo)radiotherapy, (5) physically and mentally capable of taking part in an exercise program and motivated to engage in a supervised exercise program. Patients are excluded if one of the following exclusion criteria are present: (1) < 18 years, (2) ECOG performance score ≥ 2, (3) treated with palliative intent, (4) evidence of distant metastases, (5) no basic level of reading and writing in Dutch. Participation of a patient in the study can be discontinued based on the participant’s request or if the disease is worsening, to the extent that exclusion criteria are present (treatment with palliative intent, evidence of distant metastases).

Participant screening, recruitment, and consent

Participants are identified from scheduled consultation lists and screened for eligibility criteria. Potentially eligible participants are approached and recruited during the consultation at the department of Radiation Oncology of the University Hospitals Leuven, where the oncologist (principal investigator (PI)), SN, and patient discuss the suggested treatment option. The PI will inform every new patient, diagnosed with HNC eligible for this study, about the study. All eligible patients also receive a one-on-one explanation of the study by a member of the research team and an information letter during this consult. After obtaining informed consent, patients will randomly be assigned to receive either the usual supportive care + CSEP (intervention group) or usual supportive care only (control group).

Allocation and randomization

A 4-size permuted block randomization is used. The randomization is computer-generated, in particular the allocation to the intervention or the control group is concealed and performed by the randomization module of the Research Electronic Data Capture system (REDCap) before the start of the exercise program, ensuring blinding of the research team [16, 17]. The sequence of randomization is decided by the patient’s record identifier in REDCap, which is received after signing informed consent. An open label study is performed, which means that the therapist/assessor and patients are not masked for the allocation to the intervention or control group. The therapist giving the exercise program and the assessor are the same individual during the entire study period.

Interventions

Usual supportive care

Both groups will receive the current standard of supportive care including whenever required guidance by a dietician on oral food intake, smoking cessation counseling, and speech and language therapist guidance concerning swallowing exercises, follow-up by the social workers, psychologists, and nurse care team. Additionally, they will be informed at the start of treatment about the importance of physical activities, and a brochure with general advice for exercises will be provided.

Dedicated comprehensive supervised exercise program (CSEP)

The intervention group will receive the CSEP, additional to usual supportive care. The CSEP consists of a one-hour individualized exercise program three times a week, starting within 1 week after the start of the CRT, taking into account motivation, personal goals, and pre-diagnostic activity level. The program is tailored to the acute effects of CRT as well (e.g., intensity and number of sessions). The training sessions will be organized in small groups of 3–4 patients, consisting of a combination of 30 min aerobic training at moderate intensity (walking, cycling) and 30 min resistance strength training and stretching (exercises for all major muscle groups and in particular the upper limb, head and neck region). A total of 18 supervised sessions are held in the hospital twice a week in week 1 to 6 and once a week in week 7 to 12, while the remaining one or two weekly sessions are performed independently at home. During the maintenance program (from week 13), patients will exercise at home with a monthly tele-consultation. Patients will have online access to videos of exercises to be performed at home. A selection of exercises will be made for each individual patient based on preferences and tailored to their exercise tolerance. During the tele-consultation, the physiotherapist discusses the progression of the training program at home and if any adjustments are needed.

The CSEP is supervised by a physiotherapist, KVA. The therapist will be dedicated full time to this program to conduct the patient assessments, to supervise the exercise sessions at the hospital and the tele-consultations during the maintenance program, and to coordinate the project. In addition to the exercise program, the participants in the intervention group attend in the first month an educational session about exercise during and after cancer treatment.

Outcomes

Effectiveness study

At 5 time-points, evaluation moments are organized, during which self-reported questionnaires and clinical assessments are performed. The evaluation moments take place at baseline (T0), at 6 weeks (T1), at 12 weeks (T2), at 6 months (T3), and at 12 months (T4). The assessments will be performed at the Department Physical Medicine at the University Hospitals Leuven. Most of the questionnaires are conducted at home, through a digital link to the Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap). The evaluation moments take place in the hospital. In total, administering the questionnaires through REDCap takes 60 min. The clinical assessment takes 45 to 60 min. The primary outcome parameter is health-related QOL measured with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) at 6 months post-diagnosis. A key-secondary outcome is the physical functioning subscale of the EORTC QLQ-C30. The secondary outcome measures are also shown in Tables 2 and  3. In addition, personal factors, including patient-related factors (age, social status, work status), and cancer (treatment)-related factors will be collected from the participant’s medical file.

Table 2 Study outcome measures by assessment time-point: self-reported outcomes
Full size table
Table 3 Study outcome measures by assessment time-point: clinical assessments
Full size table

Feasibility study

The feasibility study exists of a quantitative and qualitative part. First, the quantitative feasibility outcome measures are collected in all participants of the clinical trial, at baseline (T0), 12 weeks (T2), and/or 6 months (T3) follow-up. The outcomes of interest are displayed in Table 4. Second, the qualitative part of the feasibility study consists of organizing focus groups. For the focus group, we anticipate to engage 15 participants out of the total group of 150 participants at each time point (baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months). Review of the literature indicates that data regarding feasibility is typically achieved within 2 to 3 cycles of focus groups [48]. Additionally, data saturation can usually be reached with samples as small as 5 to 7 participants per group. Therefore, we aim to recruit 15 consumers for 2 to 3 focus groups. The aim of these focus groups is to capture qualitative data regarding barriers and facilitators for participating in the CSEP that provided explanation and additional information to the quantitative questionnaire. The focus group leader will ask a series of open-ended questions based predefined subjects. Another researcher will observe the focus groups. All focus group sessions will be video recorded and transcribed.

Table 4 Feasibility outcomes: quantitative part
Full size table

Sample size

The study was powered to have at least 80% power to detect based on a two-sided test with alpha equal to 0.05 a difference of 10 points in general health-related quality of life measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 (primary outcome) between both groups at the primary endpoint, i.e., 6 months post-diagnosis. A drop-out of 5%, 10%, and 20% is anticipated at 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and 6 months, respectively. Based on reference values for the EORTC QLQ-C30, a standard deviation of 22.7 was assumed [49]. Further, moderate correlations equal to 0.5 were assumed for the associations with the baseline measurement. Under these assumptions, 75 subjects per group are necessary. The study was also powered on one key-secondary outcome, i.e., the physical functioning subscale of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Since the assumed standard deviation for this subscale was slightly lower (based on the EORTC QLQ-C30 reference values 2008), this has no impact on the required sample size. Otherwise said, with 75 subjects per group, the power is higher than 80% for this secondary outcome, more specific 87.7%.

For the feasibility study, no sample size calculation was performed.

Data analysis

Effectiveness study

For the general health-related quality of life and the key-secondary outcome (physical functioning subscale), the mean value at 6 months will be compared between both groups after correction for the baseline value. To handle the presence of missing data, this ANCOVA approach will be implemented using a constrained longitudinal data analysis (cLDA) using all collected measurements over time (baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 12 months). Both comparisons will be based on a two-sided test with alpha equal to 0.05.

Feasibility study

All video recorded interviews will be transcribed verbatim. Transcripts (audio and typed feedback) will be uploaded into NVivo 12 coding software. Framework matrix analysis will categorize themes, which will yield specific, recurring information regarding patient feedback [48].

Data security and management

Data will be prospectively collected from the participating patients by the co-investigators and stored in the Research Electronic Data Capture system (REDCap) [16, 17]. Only the patient number will be recorded in the database. The investigator will maintain a personal patient identification list (patient numbers with corresponding patient names) to enable records to be identified. Clinical patient data will include coded patient-related information, including (but not limited to) age, gender, pathological diagnoses, and clinical TNM stage. The electronic patient file system of the University Hospitals of Leuven will serve as the source for the clinical information, and electronic CRFs will be used for collection of these coded data. A dedicated, trained person will add all research information from this project to the REDCap database, which was specifically designed for this research. All study data will be kept by the principal investigator and the co-investigators. All data uploaded to the cloud system will be coded data; the key of the data will be stored separately from the data. Only coded information will be extracted and used for the downstream research analysis. During the project, research data will be preserved in the shared network drives. After the project, the research data will be preserved in archive drives and external hard disks. All data will be stored for a period of 25 years after the end of the project, according to the requirements of the Clinical Trial Centre of UZ Leuven. All data will be stored on the central servers of UZ Leuven. The final responsibility will be on the principal investigator, SN.

Trial monitoring

Regarding quality assurance, assessments and interventions will be performed by an experienced physical therapist, KVA, with a master’s degree in rehabilitation sciences. The physical therapist and PI have a GCP certificate. Besides, the PI and UZ Leuven will permit trial-related monitoring, audits, EC review, and regulatory inspections (where appropriate) by providing direct access to source data and other documents.

Discussion

The clinical trial is ongoing. The recruitment started in January 2022. There are no practical or operational issues involved in performing the study.

Trial status

This is version 2.2 of the protocol, written on January 20, 2022. The recruitment started in January 26 2022, directly after approval of the Ethics Committee. The approximate date when recruitment will be completed is estimated at the end of 2024.

Availability of data and materials

The study will be conducted in compliance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (2008) and the principles of Good Clinical Practice and in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements. The investigator and the participating site shall treat all information and data relating to the study disclosed to the participating site or investigator in this study as confidential and shall not disclose such information to any third parties or use the information for any purpose other than the performance of the study. The collection, processing, and disclosure of personal data, such as patient health and medical information, are subject to compliance with applicable personal data protection and the processing of personal data (European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Belgian Law of July 30, 2018, on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data). The investigator and the participating site will protect the data from disclosure outside the research according to the terms of the research protocol. Any data required to support the protocol can be supplied on request. The datasets analyzed during the current study and statistical code can be made available by the corresponding author on reasonable request, as the full protocol.

Abbreviations

EffEx-HN:

Effect of exercise in head and neck cancer patients

RCT:

Randomized controlled trial

CSEP:

Comprehensive supervised exercise program

HNC:

Head and neck cancer

CRT:

Chemoradiotherapy

QOL:

Quality of life

ICF:

International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health

IG:

Intervention group

PI:

Principal investigator

REDCap:

Research Electronic Data Capture system

BPI:

Brief Pain Inventory

PROMIS-PF-SF:

PROMIS physical function short form

LSIDS-H&N:

Lymphedema Symptom Intensity and Distress Survey-Truncal and Head and Neck

FACIT-F:

Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy—fatigue scale

DASS-21:

Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale-21

GSES:

General Self-Efficacy Scale

PACE:

Patient-Centered Assessment and Counseling for Exercise

IPAQ:

International Physical Activity Questionnaire

QuickDASH:

Short version of the Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand

IPA:

Impact on Participation and Autonomy

PAR-Q:

Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire

BREQ-2:

Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire 2

BMI:

Body mass index

ECW:

Extracellular water

SMI:

Skeletal muscle index

CTC:

Common Toxicity Criteria

1RM:

One repetition maximum

cLDA:

Constrained longitudinal data analysis

ICF:

Informed consent form

References

  1. Wittekindt C, Wagner S, Sharma SJ, Wurdemann N, Knuth J, Reder H, et al. HPV - a different view on Head and Neck Cancer. Laryngorhinootologie. 2018;97(S 01):S48–113.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Mody MD, Rocco JW, Yom SS, Haddad RI, Saba NF. Head and neck cancer. Lancet. 2021;398(10318):2289–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ringash J, Bernstein LJ, Devins G, Dunphy C, Giuliani M, Martino R, et al. Head and neck cancer survivorship: learning the needs, meeting the needs. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2018;28(1):64–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rodriguez AM, et al. A scoping review of rehabilitation interventions for survivors of head and neck cancer. Disabil Rehabil. 2019;41(17):2093–107.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Organization WH. International classification of functioning, disability and health : ICF. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Capozzi LC, Nishimura KC, McNeely ML, Lau H, Culos-Reed SN. The impact of physical activity on health-related fitness and quality of life for patients with head and neck cancer: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2016;50(6):325–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Phillips SM, Dodd KW, Steeves J, McClain J, Alfano CM, McAuley E. Physical activity and sedentary behavior in breast cancer survivors: new insight into activity patterns and potential intervention targets. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;138(2):398–404.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Campbell KL, et al. Exercise guidelines for cancer survivors: consensus statement from International Multidisciplinary Roundtable. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2019;51(11):2375–90.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Patel AV, Friedenreich CM, Moore SC, Hayes SC, Silver JK, Campbell KL, et al. American College of Sports Medicine roundtable report on physical activity, sedentary behavior, and cancer prevention and control. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2019;51(11):2391–402.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Schmitz KH, Campbell AM, Stuiver MM, Pinto BM, Schwartz AL, Morris GS, et al. Exercise is medicine in oncology: engaging clinicians to help patients move through cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(6):468–84.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Lugo D, Pulido AL, Mihos CG, Issa O, Cusnir M, Horvath SA, et al. The effects of physical activity on cancer prevention, treatment and prognosis: a review of the literature. Complement Ther Med. 2019;44:9–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhao SG, Alexander NB, Djuric Z, Zhou J, Tao Y, Schipper M, et al. Maintaining physical activity during head and neck cancer treatment: results of a pilot controlled trial. Head Neck. 2016;38(Suppl 1):E1086–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Samuel SR, Maiya AG, Fernandes DJ, Guddattu V, Saxena PUP, Kurian JR, et al. Effectiveness of exercise-based rehabilitation on functional capacity and quality of life in head and neck cancer patients receiving chemo-radiotherapy. Support Care Cancer. 2019;27(10):3913–20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Cnossen IC, van Uden-Kraan CF, Rinkel RN, Aalders IJ, de Goede CJ, de Bree R, et al. Multimodal guided self-help exercise program to prevent speech, swallowing, and shoulder problems among head and neck cancer patients: a feasibility study. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(3):e74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Chan A-W, Tetzlaff JM, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG, Mann H, Berlin J, Dickersin K, Hróbjartsson A, Schulz KF, Parulekar WR, Krleža-Jerić K, Laupacis A, Moher D. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ. 2013;346:e7586.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)–a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, Elliott V, Fernandez M, O’Neal L, et al. The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Sprangers MAG, Bonnetain F. EORTC QLQ-C30, in Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research, A.C. Michalos, Editor. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 2014. p. 1933-1935.

  19. Singer S, et al. International validation of the revised European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Head and Neck Cancer Module. Head Neck. 2019;41(6):1725–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. CleelandCSaKMR. Pain assessment: global use of the Brief Pain Inventory. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 1994;23(2):129–38.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Rose M, et al. The PROMIS Physical Function item bank was calibrated to a standardized metric and shown to improve measurement efficiency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(5):516–26.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Jensen RE, Moinpour CM, Potosky AL, Lobo T, Hahn EA, Hays RD, et al. Responsiveness of 8 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures in a large, community-based cancer study cohort. Cancer. 2017;123(2):327–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Atkinson TM, Stover AM, Storfer DF, Saracino RM, D’Agostino TA, Pergolizzi D, et al. Patient-reported physical function measures in cancer clinical trials. Epidemiol Rev. 2017;39(1):59–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Ridner SH, Deng J, Doersam JK, Dietrich MS. Lymphedema symptom intensity and distress surveys-truncal and head and neck, Version 2.0. Lymphat Res Biol. 2021;19(3):240–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Cella D. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia (FACT-An) Scale: a new tool for the assessment of outcomes in cancer anemia and fatigue. Semin Hematol. 1997;34(3 Suppl 2):13–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. S.H. Lovibond PFL. Manual for the depression anxiety stress scales. Psychology Foundation of Australia. 1995.

  27. Luszczynska A, Scholz U, Schwarzer R. The general self-efficacy scale: multicultural validation studies. J Psychol. 2005;139(5):439–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Long BJ, Calfas KJ, Wooten W, Sallis JF, Patrick K, Goldstein M, et al. A multisite field test of the acceptability of physical activity counseling in primary care: project PACE. Am J Prev Med. 1996;12(2):73–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lee PH, Macfarlane DJ, Lam TH, Stewart SM. Validity of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire Short Form (IPAQ-SF): a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011;8:115.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Bot SD, Terwee CB, van der Windt DA, Bouter LM, Dekker J, de Vet HC. Clinimetric evaluation of shoulder disability questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(4):335–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Kersten P, Cardol M, George S, Ward C, Sibley A, White B. Validity of the impact on participation and autonomy questionnaire: a comparison between two countries. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29(19):1502–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Scheinowitz M, Dankner R, Goldbourt U, Marom-Klibansky R. Pre-participation screening of individuals engaging in noncompetitive physical activity. Harefuah. 2008;147(7):611–7, 62, 61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Markland DaT V. A modification to the behavioural regulation in exercise questionnaire to include an assessment of amotivation. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2004;26(2):191–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. McLester CN, Nickerson BS, Kliszczewicz BM, McLester JR. Reliability and agreement of various inbody body composition analyzers as compared to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in healthy men and women. J Clin Densitom. 2020;23(3):443–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Brewer GJ, Blue MNM, Hirsch KR, Saylor HE, Gould LM, Nelson AG, et al. Validation of InBody 770 bioelectrical impedance analysis compared to a four-compartment model criterion in young adults. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2021;41(4):317–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Anand A, et al. Secondary lymphedema after head and neck cancer therapy: a review. Lymphology. 2018;51(3):109–18.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Mayrovitz HN, Patel A, Kavadi R, Khan Z, Bartolone S. An Approach toward assessing head-and-neck lymphedema using tissue dielectric constant ratios: method and normal reference values. Lymphat Res Biol. 2021;19(6):562–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Arends CR, Molen van der L, Brekel van den MWM, Stuiver MM. Assessment of local tissue water measurements (TDC) in the head and neck area of healthy participants: test-retest reliability. International Lymphoedema Framework. 2021. p. 138.

  39. Chotipanich A, Kongpit N. Precision and reliability of tape measurements in the assessment of head and neck lymphedema. PLoS One. 2020;15(5):e0233395.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Cavaletti G, Cornblath DR, Merkies ISJ, Postma TJ, Rossi E, Frigeni B, et al. The chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy outcome measures standardization study: from consensus to the first validity and reliability findings. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(2):454–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Hoeller U, Tribius S, Kuhlmey A, Grader K, Fehlauer F, Alberti W. Increasing the rate of late toxicity by changing the score? A comparison of RTOG/EORTC and LENT/SOMA scores. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55(4):1013–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Harrington S, Gilchrist L, Sander A. Breast Cancer EDGE Task Force Outcomes: clinical measures of pain. Rehabil Oncol. 2014;32(1):13–21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. De Groef A, Van Kampen M, Vervloesem N, Clabau E, Christiaens MR, Neven P, et al. Inter-rater reliability of shoulder measurements in middle-aged women. Physiotherapy. 2017;103(2):222–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Eden MM, Tompkins J, Verheijde JL. Reliability and a correlational analysis of the 6MWT, ten-meter walk test, thirty second sit to stand, and the linear analog scale of function in patients with head and neck cancer. Physiother Theory Pract. 2018;34(3):202–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Peddle-McIntyre CJ, Cavalheri V, Boyle T, McVeigh JA, Jeffery E, Lynch BM, et al. A review of accelerometer-based activity monitoring in cancer survivorship research. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2018;50(9):1790–801.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. De Craemer M, McGregor D, Androutsos O, Manios Y. Compliance with 24-h Movement Behaviour Guidelines among Belgian Pre-School Children: The ToyBox-Study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(10):2171.

  47. De Craemer M, Decraene M, Willems I, Buysse F, Van Driessche E, Verbestel V. Objective Measurement of 24-Hour Movement Behaviors in Preschool Children Using Wrist-Worn and Thigh-Worn Accelerometers. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18:9482.

  48. Sandelowski M. Whatever happened to qualitative description? Res Nurs Health. 2000;23(4):334–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Scott NW, et al. EORTC QLQ-C30 reference values. 2008.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all the trial participants.

Funding

The study will be performed thanks to the scientific grant obtained by Kom op tegen Kanker (Stand up against Cancer). The funding body—Kom Op Tegen Kanker—has no role in the design of the study and collection, analyses, and interpretation of the data. They do have an important role in the dissemination and valorization of the results. They will assist in the dissemination to the general public, patients, healthcare providers, and policy makers.

The University Hospital Leuven has no role in the design of the study; collection, analyses, and interpretation of the data; and writing the manuscript. Their role is to ensure quality of the trial, including ethical approval, at the study site.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Kaat Van Aperen, Heleen Bollen & Sandra Nuyts

  2. Department of Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Kaat Van Aperen, An De Groef, Nele Devoogdt, Tessa De Vrieze & Thierry Troosters

  3. Department of Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy, MOVANT Research Group, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium

    An De Groef & Tessa De Vrieze

  4. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Nele Devoogdt

  5. Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Nele Devoogdt

  6. Respiratory Rehabilitation and Respiratory Division, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Thierry Troosters

  7. Department of Radiation Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Heleen Bollen & Sandra Nuyts

Authors
  1. Kaat Van Aperen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. An De Groef
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nele Devoogdt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tessa De Vrieze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Thierry Troosters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Heleen Bollen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Sandra Nuyts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

SN, ADG, and HB conceived the study idea. ND, TT, and TDV contributed to the design of the study. SN, ADG, and KVA drafted the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kaat Van Aperen.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study will be conducted only on the basis of prior informed consent by the subjects to participate in the study. The investigator at the department of Radiation Oncology shall obtain a signed informed consent form (ICF) for all patients prior to their enrollment and participation in the study in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and the approval of the Ethics Committee. The Department of Radiation Oncology shall retain the ICFs in accordance with the requirements of all applicable regulatory agencies and laws. The subject’s name and other identifiers will be stored separately from their research data and replaced with a unique code to create a new identity for the subject. The participant information materials and informed consent form are available from the corresponding author on request. The study protocol and other documentation were submitted to the Ethics Committee Research UZ/KU Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven. Ethics approval was granted. Any subsequent protocol amendments will be submitted to the Ethics Committee of UZ Leuven for approval.

Ethical Committee of the University Hospitals Leuven: s65549

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Support statement: ADG is a postdoctoral fellow of the Research Foundations Flanders, Belgium. SN is supported by a clinical research mandate from the Flemish Foundation of Scientific Research (FWO-Vlaanderen, 18B4122N).

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Van Aperen, K., De Groef, A., Devoogdt, N. et al. EffEx-HN trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial on the EFFectiveness and feasibility of a comprehensive supervised EXercise program during radiotherapy in Head and Neck cancer patients on health-related quality of life. Trials 24, 276 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-023-07170-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-023-07170-x

Keywords

Trials

ISSN: 1745-6215