Telehealth-Supported Home Exercise vs. Center-Based Rehabilitation in Lymphoma Survivors: A Randomized Trial

Article Impact Level: HIGH
Data Quality: STRONG
Summary of  Cancer Control,  https://doi.org/10.1177/10732748261455980 
Dr. Katerina Chamradova  et al.

Points

A randomized controlled trial of 69 lymphoma survivors entering cardio-oncology rehabilitation compared 12 weeks of telehealth-supported home exercise against traditional center-based programs.
Peak oxygen uptake and maximal workload improved similarly in both cohorts, showing no significant baseline-adjusted differences between the home and center-based groups at 12 weeks.
Functional capacity and quality of life measures evaluated via the Short Form-36 Physical Functioning scale demonstrated statistically comparable short-term improvements across both cohorts.
Therapeutic adherence was remarkably high for both intervention groups, reaching 80.1% in the home-based exercise arm and 77.9% in the supervised center-based arm.
Implementing the remote telehealth model resulted in zero reported adverse events and reduced individual participant delivery costs by 48% compared to center-based rehabilitation.

Summary

This randomized controlled trial evaluated the short-term efficacy, adherence, and cost-effectiveness of a 12-week telehealth-supported home-based exercise (HBE) program compared to center-based exercise (CBE) among 69 lymphoma survivors entering cardio-oncology rehabilitation (CORE). Lymphoma survivors face elevated cardiovascular risks and diminished cardiorespiratory fitness due to cardiotoxic therapies. The study sought to determine if a remote delivery model could safely match the clinical outcomes of traditional, supervised in-person rehabilitation while improving patient access.

Hemodynamic and functional assessments at 12 weeks demonstrated that telehealth-supported HBE achieves comparable short-term physiological improvements to CBE. Peak oxygen uptake improved significantly within both cohorts, exhibiting no significant baseline-adjusted between-group differences at the study’s conclusion. Furthermore, no significant between-group variances were observed for maximal workload capacity or quality-of-life metrics via the Short Form-36 Physical Functioning scale. (Note: Specific confidence intervals and hazard ratios were not reported in the source data).

Both delivery models exhibited high therapeutic adherence, with the HBE group completing 80.1% of prescribed sessions compared to 77.9% in the CBE group. Safety profiles were excellent across both arms, with zero adverse events reported during the 12-week intervention. Notably, resource utilization analysis revealed that costs per participant were 48% lower for the HBE model. Telehealth-guided HBE represents a pragmatic, economically viable strategy to expand CORE access, though larger, long-term trials are required to confirm sustained clinical outcomes and optimize patient selection.

Link to the article: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10732748261455980?__cf_chl_f_tk=k5KcqWnZ4antjn.wlOJ3Nz3ezJVsn_EIGpCqSNeYQZU-1782890757-1.0.1.1-WqvZR2VsMQ1OacFlD4kdLwdGp6hKBTUjVZKJSKVKnDM

References

Chamradova, K., Batalik, L., Winnige, P., Dosbaba, F., Hartman, M., Felsoci, M., Pepera, G., & Su, J. (2026). Effects of home-based exercise with telehealth guidance in lymphoma survivors entering cardio-oncology rehabilitation: A randomized controlled trial. Cancer Control, 33, 10732748261455980. https://doi.org/10.1177/10732748261455980