Reporting attendance and resistance exercise compliance in men with localized prostate cancer

Document Type

Journal Article

Publication Title

Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise


Wolters Kluwer


Exercise Medicine Research Institute / School of Medical and Health Sciences




Cancer Australia

Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia

Beyond Blue

National Health and Medical Research Council

Grant Number

NHMRC Number : 1029901


Lopez, P., Taaffe, D. R., Newton, R. U., Spry, N., Joseph, D., Tang, C., . . . Galvão, D. A. (2023). Reporting attendance and resistance exercise compliance in men with localized prostate cancer. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 55(3), 354-364.



Resistance exercise is a well-established intervention to counteract musculoskeletal and metabolic toxicities from prostate cancer treatment. In this study, we reported resistance exercise attendance and compliance, and examined if these variables can influence changes in outcomes of interest in men with localized or locally advanced prostate cancer.


A total of 83 prostate cancer patients (age, 68.2 ± 7.0 yr; body mass index, 27.7 ± 3.8 kg·m−2) who had undergone 6 months of resistance-based exercise and had data available on exercise training from logbook records were examined. Attendance outcomes such as missed sessions, interruptions and permanent discontinuation, and metrics such as dosage completed (sessions × number of exercises × sets × repetitions × external load), compliance, tolerance, reductions, and escalations were assessed. Outcomes assessed were body composition, physical function, and muscle strength.


Median resistance exercise attendance was 80.6%, with a median resistance exercise compliance of 88.5% (interquartile range [IQR], 61.1%–107.1%) per participant. A median of 11 (IQR, 1–26) and 0 (IQR, 0–2) sessions were escalated or reduced, respectively. Significant improvements were observed in whole-body lean mass, 400-m walk, repeated chair rise, leg press, and chest press strength after 6 months of intervention (P < 0.05) regardless of resistance exercise compliance (Ptrend = 0.199–0.950). Participants with higher levels of resistance exercise compliance presented greater improvements in trunk fat mass (Ptrend = 0.026) and appendicular lean mass (Ptrend = 0.047).


A higher resistance exercise compliance led to greater improvements in regional fat and lean mass, whereas physical function and muscle strength improvements were achieved with lower compliance. In addition, patients experienced a high number of dose escalations during the intervention. These findings are important to improve the reproducibility/precision of exercise medicine prescription.



Access Rights

subscription content