# A pilot study examining the effects of low-volume high-intensity interval training and continuous low to moderate intensity training on quality of life, functional capacity and cardiovascular risk factors in cancer survivors

PMID: 27781180
Journal: PeerJ
Published: 2016-10-20
Authors: Toohey K, Pumpa KL, Arnolda L, Cooke J, Yip D, Craft PS, Semple S

## Question

To examine the effects of low-volume high-intensity interval training versus continuous low-to-moderate intensity training on cardiovascular disease risk, quality of life, functional capacity, and related health outcomes in cancer survivors.

## Summary

This small randomized pilot study compared 12 weeks of supervised low-volume HIIT with supervised continuous low-to-moderate intensity training in female cancer survivors within 24 months of diagnosis. Both programs were associated with improvements across several quality-of-life, functional, anthropometric, and cardiovascular risk variables. The HIIT group improved more on the six-minute walk test, attended sessions well, and reported no adverse effects, but the study was very small, lacked a non-exercise control group, and did not control diet.

## Population

- Female cancer survivors within 24 months post-diagnosis, post-treatment, insufficiently active, and medically cleared for supervised exercise.
- Sample size: 16
- Age: Mean 51.6 years, SD 13.01.
- Sex: Female.
- Fitness level: Insufficiently active by ACSM aerobic activity thresholds.
- Health status: Post-treatment cancer survivors with diagnoses including breast, ovarian, colon, cervical, melanoma, and combined cancer diagnoses.

## Methodology

- Randomized supervised pilot intervention comparing two active exercise programs.
- 12 weeks; 36 supervised sessions.
- Supervised exercise sessions conducted by an Accredited Exercise Physiologist; exercise on treadmill or cycle ergometer.
- Randomized and controlled study design.

## Protocol

- LVHIIT.
- Modality: Cycle ergometer or treadmill.
- Work intervals: 30 seconds.
- Recovery: 1 minute between intervals.
- Sets or repetitions: 7 intervals after progression; started with 3 intervals in session 1.
- Intensity: At least 85% maximal heart rate, estimated from 220 minus age.
- Session duration: Approximately 18.5 minutes once at full protocol, including 5-minute warm-up and 5-minute cool-down.
- Frequency: 3 sessions per week.
- Program length: 12 weeks.
- Progression: One interval added per session over four sessions; full seven intervals by session 5.
- CLMIT.
- Modality: Cycle ergometer or treadmill.
- Work intervals: Continuous 20 minutes.
- Sets or repetitions: One continuous aerobic bout.
- Intensity: No more than 55% maximal heart rate, estimated from 220 minus age.
- Session duration: 30 minutes including 5-minute warm-up, 20-minute continuous exercise, and 5-minute cool-down.
- Frequency: 3 sessions per week.
- Program length: 12 weeks.

## Outcomes

### Overall dependent variables
Status: improved
Significant time improvements were observed for 13 of 23 dependent variables.

p <= 0.05; ES 0.05-0.61.

### Six-minute walk test
Status: improved
LVHIIT improved more than CLMIT: CLMIT changed 1.16% whereas LVHIIT changed 18.53%.

Group-by-time interaction; partial eta squared 0.50; abstract reports p <= 0.01.

### Quality of life
Status: improved
FACT-G improved in both groups, with a larger percent change in LVHIIT.

CLMIT 81.25 to 85.88, 6.14% (95% CI 1.84 to 10.45); LVHIIT 77.63 to 89.50, 17.44% (95% CI 6.65 to 28.23).

### Training heart rate and adherence
Status: improved
LVHIIT achieved average interval heart rate of 144.76 bpm and high session compliance was reported.

Interval HR 144.76 (SD 10.34) bpm; recovery HR 118.34 (SD 8.70) bpm; overall compliance 93.75% (83.33%-100%).

### Adverse effects
Status: no clear change
No adverse effects were reported by participants during the study.

## Practical Insights

- A low-volume interval structure with only 3.5 minutes of hard work per session can be feasible in selected, supervised cancer survivors.
- Progressing from three to seven intervals over the first five sessions is a practical ramp for deconditioned or clinical users.
- Clinical-population HIIT programming should preserve screening, monitoring, warm-up, cool-down, and conservative progression.

## Limitations

- Small pilot sample.
- No non-exercise control group.
- No dietary intake control.
- All randomized completers were female cancer survivors, limiting generalizability.
- Supervised equipment-based setting limits direct translation to unsupervised app workouts.

## Safety And Adherence

- No adverse effects were reported by participants.
- Participants required medical screening and physician clearance.
- Sessions were supervised with heart-rate and blood-pressure monitoring.

## Original Sources

- [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27781180/) (pubmed)
- [DOI](https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2613) (doi)
- [PMC full text](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5075690/) (full text)

## Agent Guidance

Preserve the paper-level scope of this note. Do not generalize beyond the population, protocol, measured outcomes, and limitations above.