Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Predictors of the 6-min walk test in patients with ovarian cancer

  • Research
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To identify the predictors of the 6-min walk test (6MWT) and investigate the relationship between 6MWT, performance status, functional mobility, fatigue, quality of life, neuropathy, physical activity level, and peripheral muscle strength in patients with ovarian cancer (OC).

Methods

Twenty-four patients diagnosed with stage II-III ovarian cancer were included in the study. Patients were assessed using the following measurement methods: 6MWT for walking capacity, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Scale (ECOG-PS) for performance status, an armband physical activity monitor for physical activity level, Checklist Individual Strength (CIS) for fatigue, Functional Cancer Treatment Evaluation with Quality of Life-Extreme (FACT-O) for quality of life, Functional Evaluation of Cancer Treatment/Gynecological Oncology-Neurotoxicity (FACT/GOG-NTX) for neuropathy, a hand-held dynamometer for peripheral muscle strength, and 30-s chair-stand test for functional mobility.

Results

The mean 6MWT distance was 578.48 ± 115.33 meters. 6MWT distance correlated with ECOG-PS score (r = −0.438, p = 0.032), handgrip strength (r = 0.452, p= 0030), METs (r = 0.414, p = 0.044) 30s-CST (r= 0.417, p= 0.043), and neuropathy score (r = 0.417, p = 0.043) significantly. There was no relationship between 6MWT distance and other parameters (p> 0.05). Multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated that performance status was the sole predictor of 6MWT.

Conclusion

The walking capacity seems to be associated with performance status, peripheral muscle strength, level of physical activity, functional mobility, and severity of neuropathy in patients with ovarian cancer. Evaluating these may help clinicians to understand factors behind the decreased walking capacity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rojas V et al (2016) Molecular characterization of epithelial ovarian cancer: implications for diagnosis and treatment. Int J Mol Sci 17(12):2113. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms17122113

  2. Stewart C, Ralyea C, Lockwood S (2019) Ovarian cancer: an integrated review. In: Seminars in oncology nursing. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.10106/J.soncn.2019.02.001

  3. Tarhriz V et al (2019) Overview of CD24 as a new molecular marker in ovarian cancer. J Cell Physiol 234(3):2134–2142. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcp.27581

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ahmed-Lecheheb D, Joly F (2016) Ovarian cancer survivors’ quality of life: a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv 10(5):789–801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-016-0525-8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Huang MH et al (2014) History of falls, balance performance, and quality of life in older cancer survivors. Gait Posture 40(3):451–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.05.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Campbell G et al (2016) Cancer and treatment-related symptoms are associated with mobility disability in women with ovarian cancer: a cross-sectional study. Gynecol Oncol 143(3):578–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.09.013

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Schootman M, Aft R, Jeffe DBJC (2009) An evaluation of lower-body functional limitations among long-term survivors of 11 different types of cancers. Cancer 115(22):5329–5338. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24606

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kenzik KM et al (2015) Symptoms, weight loss, and physical function in a lifestyle intervention study of older cancer survivors. J Geriatr Oncol 6(6):424–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgo.2015.08.004

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Overcash JA, Beckstead J (2008) Predicting falls in older patients using components of a comprehensive geriatric assessment. Clin J Oncol Nurs 12(6):941–949. https://doi.org/10.1188/08.Cjon.941-949

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ezendam NP et al (2014) Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy and its impact on health-related quality of life among ovarian cancer survivors: results from the population-based PROFILES registry. Gynecol Oncol 135(3):510–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.09.016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Holland AE et al (2014) An official European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society technical standard: field walking tests in chronic respiratory disease. Eur Respir J (6):1428–1446

  12. Schmidt K et al (2013) Validity of the six-minute walk test in cancer patients. Int J Sports Med 34(7):631–636. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1323746

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tomruk M et al (2015) Predictors of functional capacity in colorectal cancer patients. Support Care Cancer 23(9):2747–2754. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-2639-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kokkonen K et al (2017) The functional capacity and quality of life of women with advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer 24(1):128–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-016-0687-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fisher MI et al (2015) Oncology section EDGE task force on breast cancer outcomes: a systematic review of outcome measures for functional mobility. Rehabil Oncol 33(3):19–31

  16. ATS Committee on Proficiency Standards for Clinical Pulmonary Function Laboratories (2002) ATS statement: guidelines for the six-minute walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 166(1):111–117. https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm.166.1.at1102

  17. Api M et al (2019) Validation of Turkish version of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) for gynecologic oncology patients. Int J Gynecol Cancer A617–A617. https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2019-ESGO.1236

  18. Servaes P, Verhagen S, Bleijenberg G (2002) Determinants of chronic fatigue in disease-free breast cancer patients: a cross-sectional study. Ann Oncol 13(4):589–598. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdf082

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ergin G, Yildirim Y (2012) A validity and reliability study of the Turkish Checklist Individual Strength (CIS) questionnaire in musculoskeletal physical therapy patients. Physiother Theory Pract 28(8):624–632. https://doi.org/10.3109/09593985.2011.654321

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Basen-Engquist K et al (2001) Reliability and validity of the functional assessment of cancer therapy–ovarian. J Clin Oncol 19(6):1809–1817. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2001.19.6.1809

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Jones CJ et al (1999) A 30-s chair-stand test as a measure of lower body strength in community-residing older adults. Res Q Exerc Sport 70(2):113–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1999.10608028

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Almadrones L et al (2004) Psychometric evaluation of two scales assessing functional status and peripheral neuropathy associated with chemotherapy for ovarian cancer: a gynecologic oncology group study. Oncol Nurs Forum 31(3):615–623. https://doi.org/10.1188/04.Onf.615-623

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Anand A, Gajra AJJGGR (2018) Hand grip dynamometry as prognostic and predictive marker in older patients with cancer. 7(10.4172):2167-7182.1000471. https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-7182.1000471

  24. Roberts HC et al (2011) A review of the measurement of grip strength in clinical and epidemiological studies: towards a standardised approach. Age Ageing 40(4):423–429. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afr051

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Cereda E et al (2007) Assessing energy expenditure in cancer patients: a pilot validation of a new wearable device. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 31(6):502–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/0148607107031006502

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Portney LG, Watkins MP (2009) Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice (3rd edn). Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojmp.2014.31011

  27. Newton MJ et al (2011) Safety, feasibility and effects of an individualised walking intervention for women undergoing chemotherapy for ovarian cancer: a pilot study. BMC Cancer 11(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-11-389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. But-Hadzic J et al (2021) Six-minute walk distance in breast cancer survivors—a systematic review with meta-analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 18(5):2591. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052591

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Angst F et al (2020) Cross-sectional validity and specificity of comprehensive measurement in lymphedema and lipedema of the lower extremity: a comparison of five outcome instruments. 2020. 18(1): p. 1-12. Life Outcomes 18:245.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01488-9

  30. Courneya KS (2003) Exercise in cancer survivors: an overview of research. Med Sci Sports Exerc 35(11):1846–1852. https://doi.org/10.1249/01.Mss.0000093622.41587.B6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Duarte ACF et al (2021) Grip strength, functional capacity, and quality of life of individuals with cancer. Fisioterapia e Pesquisa 27:362–369. https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-2950/19039127042020

  32. Paek J, Choi YJ (2019) Association between hand grip strength and impaired health-related quality of life in Korean cancer survivors: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 9(9):e030938. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030938

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Winters-Stone KM et al (2017) Falls, functioning, and disability among women with persistent symptoms of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. .J Clin Oncol 35(23):2604. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.71.3552

  34. Oken MM et al (1982) Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol 5(6):649–656

  35. Jones LW et al (2009) Assessment of physical functioning in recurrent glioma: preliminary comparison of performance status to functional capacity testing. J Neurooncol 94(1):79–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-009-9803-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Williams LA et al (2013) Capturing the patient’s experience: using qualitative methods to develop a measure of patient-reported symptom burden: an example from ovarian cancer. J Pain Symptom Manag 46(6):837–845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.02.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Beesley VL et al (2020) When will I feel normal again? Trajectories and predictors of persistent symptoms and poor wellbeing after primary chemotherapy for ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 159(1):179–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.07.029

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Monk BJ et al (2013) Patient reported outcomes of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of bevacizumab in the front-line treatment of ovarian cancer: a gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol 128(3):573–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.11.038

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kampshoff CS et al (2015) Randomized controlled trial of the effects of high intensity and low-to-moderate intensity exercise on physical fitness and fatigue in cancer survivors: results of the Resistance and Endurance exercise After ChemoTherapy (REACT) study. BMC Med. 13(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0513-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Soares-Miranda L et al (2021) Physical fitness and health-related quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer. Int J Sports Med 42(10):924–929. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1342-7347

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Aabo MR et al (2021) Reliability of graded cycling test with talk test and 30-s chair-stand test in men with prostate cancer on androgen deprivation therapy. Support Care Cancer 29(8):4249–4256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-020-05918-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Crawford JJ et al (2017) A pilot randomized, controlled trial of a wall climbing intervention for gynecologic cancer survivors. Oncol Nurs Forum 44(1):77–86. https://doi.org/10.1188/17.ONF.77-86

  43. Rock CL et al (2012) Nutrition and physical activity guidelines for cancer survivors. CA Cancer J Clin 62(4):243–274. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Jones T et al (2021) Physical activity levels among ovarian cancer survivors: a prospective longitudinal cohort study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 31(4):553–561. https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2020-002107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Ozel CB et al (2017) An evaluation of the functional capacity and physical activity level in patients with breast cancer. Eur Respiratory Soc 50(supp 61):PA2523. https://doi.org/10.1183/1393003.congress-2017.PA2523

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health Sciences, Democracy University, Izmir, Turkey

    Ayse Sezgi Kızılırmak

  2. Department of Cardiopulmonary Physiotherapy-Rehabilitation, Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey

    Didem Karadibak

  3. Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Graduate School of Health Sciences, Dokuz Eylul University, Balcova, Izmir, Turkey

    Sukriye Cansu Gultekin

  4. Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health Sciences, Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey

    Ismail Ozsoy

  5. Clinic of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Buca Obstetrics Gynecology and Pediatrics Disease Hospital, Izmir, Turkey

    Husnu Tore Yavuzsen

  6. Department of Medical Oncology, Institute of Oncology, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey

    Tugba Yavuzsen & Ilhan Oztop

Authors
  1. Ayse Sezgi Kızılırmak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Didem Karadibak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sukriye Cansu Gultekin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ismail Ozsoy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Husnu Tore Yavuzsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Tugba Yavuzsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ilhan Oztop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by Ayse Sezgi Kızılırmak, Didem Karadibak, Husnu Tore Yavuzsen, Tugba Yavuzsen, and Ilhan Oztop. Analysis was performed by Sukriye Cansu Gultekin and Ismail Ozsoy. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Sukriye Cansu Gultekin, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sukriye Cansu Gultekin.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

The ethics committee approval of the study was obtained from the Dokuz Eylul University Non-Interventional Clinical Research Ethics Committee with decision number: 2018/04-15 on 8th March 2018. This study was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

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

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kızılırmak, A.S., Karadibak, D., Gultekin, S.C. et al. Predictors of the 6-min walk test in patients with ovarian cancer. Support Care Cancer 31, 248 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-023-07706-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-023-07706-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation