IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i5p2591-d510929.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Six-Minute Walk Distance in Breast Cancer Survivors—A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Jasna But-Hadzic

    (Department of Radiation Oncology, Institute of Oncology, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
    Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia)

  • Mirza Dervisevic

    (Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia)

  • Damir Karpljuk

    (Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia)

  • Mateja Videmsek

    (Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia)

  • Edvin Dervisevic

    (Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia)

  • Armin Paravlic

    (Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
    Science and Research Centre, Institute of Kinesiology Research, 6000 Koper, Slovenia)

  • Vedran Hadzic

    (Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia)

  • Katja Tomazin

    (Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia)

Abstract

The six-minute walk test (6MWT) is a widely used test for the indirect measurement of cardiorespiratory fitness in various cancer populations. Although the 6MWT is a simple test, there are no normative values for breast cancer survivors (BCS) or comparisons of results with healthy counterparts. A systematic review with a meta-analysis was carried out, which included studies from 2007 to 2020. Ninety-one studies were found, 21 of which were included in the quantitative synthesis. Among them were 9 randomized controlled trials (RCT), 8 prospective cohort studies and 4 cross-sectional studies. A total of 1084 BCS were included. Our results revealed that healthy subjects (n = 878) covered a significantly greater distance than BCS during the 6MWT (589.9 m vs. 477.4 m, p < 0.001), and the results of the meta-regression analysis showed that the 6MWD was predicted by the participants’ BMI ( p < 0.001), but not by their age ( p = 0.070). After adjustment for BMI, the healthy subjects also covered greater distances than the BCS (103 m; p < 0.001). The normative values of 6MWT were presented for BCS. Besides, 6MWT distances distinguish between their healthy counterparts, therefore, the 6MWT distance is a relevant parameter for the assessment and monitoring of cardiorespiratory fitness in medical and exercise interventions for BCS.

Suggested Citation

  • Jasna But-Hadzic & Mirza Dervisevic & Damir Karpljuk & Mateja Videmsek & Edvin Dervisevic & Armin Paravlic & Vedran Hadzic & Katja Tomazin, 2021. "Six-Minute Walk Distance in Breast Cancer Survivors—A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-13, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:5:p:2591-:d:510929
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/5/2591/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/5/2591/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas J. Anthis & Marion H. E. Kavanaugh-Lynch, 2020. "The Global Challenge to Prevent Breast Cancer: Surfacing New Ideas to Accelerate Prevention Research," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-10, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Juan Gavala-González & Ismael Gálvez-Fernández & Pere Mercadé-Melé & José Carlos Fernández-García, 2020. "Rowing Training in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Longitudinal Study of Physical Fitness," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-12, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:5:p:2591-:d:510929. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.