ArticleCancer medicine2026
Haematological and Oncological Training Therapy With Stationary Strength and Cardio Machines (HOT) in Routine Cancer Care: A 3-Year Real-World Evaluation of Acceptance, Feasibility, Safety, and Effects.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundExercise improves physical function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with cancer; however, nationwide structured programmes remain limited. A hospital in Germany implemented a donation-funded Haematological and Oncological Training Therapy with Stationary Strength and Cardio Machines (HOT), and a 3-year real-world data analysis aimed to evaluate its acceptance, feasibility, safety, and effects.
methodsHOT comprised 24 sessions of combined resistance and aerobic training, complemented by a sensorimotor module for patients with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN), with a target frequency of two sessions per week. Patients with all cancer types and treatment phases were eligible. The study evaluated acceptance (e.g., participants' clinical and sociodemographic characteristics, reasons for premature discontinuation), feasibility (e.g., completion rate, training density), safety (adverse events), and effects (changes in strength [1-repetition maximum, 1-RM], cardiopulmonary performance [maximum power on a cycle ergometer], and patient-reported outcomes [HRQoL, fatigue, CIPN]) within a quasi-experimental pre-post design.
resultsBetween April 2021 and March 2024, 70 patients (60% female; mean age, 63 ± 12 years; range, 31-91 years) participated; 61% had solid tumours and 39% haematological malignancies, and 57% were undergoing active cancer treatment. Most participants (94%) had a history of sports participation. A total of 53 participants (76%) completed HOT, while 17 (24%) discontinued prematurely, mainly for health-related reasons. The training density among completers was 1.6 sessions per week. One adverse event occurred during a 1-RM test. Significant improvements were observed in strength and cardiopulmonary performance (p < 0.05), as well as in global HRQoL (p < 0.001), fatigue (p < 0.001), and CIPN (p = 0.003).
conclusionHOT appeared to primarily attract sports-experienced patients, with haematological malignancies overrepresented. HOT proved to be safe and feasible across diverse cancer entities and treatment phases and was associated with improvement in physical function and HRQoL. The participants' high baseline motivation for exercise may limit generalisability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.