Cancer-Related Fatigue

Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Treatment

Background: Many cancer patients suffer from cancer-related fatigue (CRF) both during and after their treatment. CRF can arise at any point in the course of the disease and can be either self-limited or persistent, sometimes for years. It gives rise to a vicious circle of impaired physical performance, avoidance of exertion, inactivity, inadequate physical recovery, helplessness, and depressed mood. Its hallmarks are tiredness, exhaustion, and lack of energy; it can impair performance so severely that the patient is unable to work. It is associated with increased mortality. Cancer patients are hardly ever systematically asked about the symptoms and signs of CRF. The stress and impairments that it produces are often inadequately appreciated, and the opportunities for treatment often neglected.

Method: Selective review of the pertinent literature, including published guidelines from Germany and abroad.

Results: The pathogenesis of CRF is complex, involving an interaction of somatic, emotional, cognitive, and psychosocial factors, with a highly variable pattern of clinical expression. Clinical history-taking plays a key role in diagnostic assessment. Depressive disorders must be considered in the differential diagnosis. Many randomized trials and meta-analyses have documented the efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for CRF.

Conclusion: Cancer-related fatigue is a serious problem that impairs patients physically, mentally, and socially. Physicians need to know how to recognize and treat it.

A wide variety of complex diagnostic and therapeutic techniques that have arisen through advances in modern oncology now enable more frequent cures, or at least longer survival and a better quality of life, for patients with cancer. Unfortunately, however, for many patients this also means that they will have to endure arduous treatment regimens, and in addition may suffer long term sequelae subsequent to their illness and its treatment.

Fatigue, lack of energy, exhaustion, and impaired physical performance are among the most common symptoms in cancer patients and can have severe physical, emotional, and social effects. The syndrome of fatigue and exhaustion in cancer patients is commonly described as “cancer-related fatigue” (CRF) by oncologists around the world (1).

Learning objectives

In this article, we discuss the following aspects of CRF:

• clinical features,
• epidemiology,
• etiology and pathogenesis,
• diagnostic evaluation and differential diagnosis, and
• pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments of CRF.

Methods

This article is based on a selective review of the pertinent literature (retrieved by searches in the Cochrane Library, Embase, and Medline), also taking account of the guidelines of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN, [2]) and the German College of General Practitioners and Family Physicians (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Allgemeinmedizin und Familienmedizin [DEGAM], [3]), as well as a consensus statement of the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC, [4]).

Clinical features

The multifarious manifestations of CRF include feelings of exhaustion and lack of energy, loss of drive and personal interests, and impaired memory and concentration. The affected patients vary widely in their manner of expressing and describing the problems that they experience. Qualitative studies have shown that the clinical features are highly individual, and hardly any two patients are alike (5, e1). Typically, no clear relation exists between the symptoms and whatever activities immediately precede them; moreover, unlike normal fatigue and exhaustion, CRF often fails to improve, or does so only slightly, after rest or sleep (6). Many patients also suffer from pain, sleep disturbances, and emotional distress, including anxiety and depression (7–9) (Box 1).

Box 1

Clinical features of cancer-related fatigue

Among all symptoms that tend to affect cancer patients in particular—e.g., pain, sleep disturbances, lack of appetite, or nausea—those of CRF are perceived as most distressing (e2, e3). CRF markedly impairs the quality of life and the physical performance ability of many of the affected patients (10, e3, e4).

Multiple prospective studies have shown an association of the manifestations of CRF with shorter survival and increased mortality (e5, e6). CRF can arise at any point in the course of the disease: It may be an early symptom even before the cancer is diagnosed, or it may arise during the treatment, long after the treatment is over, or when the disease recurs or progresses. Its symptoms may be temporary, but they may also persist, remaining present in some cases for years after the end of treatment (e7). The worse the symptoms of CRF are during the treatment phase (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy), the more likely they are to persist or recur once the treatment is over (e8).

Effects

Depending on the course and severity of the underlying disease, the effects of CRF can range from temporary indisposition to inadequate coping with everyday life and social withdrawal (e9) all the way to the inability to perform one’s job and earn a living, leading to economic hardship for the patient and an additional economic burden for society at large (e10, e11). Thus, CRF clearly poses a problem not only for the patients themselves, but also for the persons around them (e12).

Many studies have shown that physicians generally fail to ask cancer patients systematically about the symptoms and signs of CRF. Therefore, the treating teams often do not realize the extent of stress and impairment caused by CRF and consequently underestimate the need for treatment (11, 12). There are reasons for inadequate communication about CRF on both sides of the physician–patient relationship. Patients may not volunteer information about the symptoms of CRF for fear of seeming to complain too much, or they may think these are “normal” side effects of their disease and its treatment. They may also fear that such symptoms herald a recurrence of cancer, or that mentioning them could delay treatment (e13, e14). On the other hand, treating teams may miss the opportunity to communicate appropriately about CRF because of time pressure or because of inadequate acquaintance with the diagnosis and treatment of CRF (11). Not least, both the treating physician(s) and the patient’s family and friends may wrongly compare the patient’s symptoms with their own everyday fatigue and fail to take the manifestations of CRF seriously (e15, e16).

Prevalence

When interpreting epidemiological figures about cancer-related fatigue (CRF), one must bear in mind that CRF is not a single nosological entity, even though it is characterized by a typical constellation of symptoms and signs. In epidemiological studies, the frequency of CRF is often gauged with the aid of self-assessment questionnaires. Those that include items about the various dimensions of CRF (somatic, affective, and cognitive), such as the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI), are considered the “gold standard” (e17). In reality, however, many different types of questionnaires are used, and the thresholds for the assignment of a diagnosis of CRF vary widely as well, with the result that the reported prevalence figures are distributed over a wide range. In a recent longitudinal study of CRF in a representative sample of cancer patients in Germany, symptoms of fatigue and exhaustion that were markedly worse than those of a control group of healthy individuals (as measured on the “general fatigue” subscale of the MFI) were found in 32% of patients on their admission to the hospital, 40% on discharge, and 36% six months later (13). In a further study by Kuhnt et al., 48% of patients still had symptoms and signs of CRF—and 12% had very severe signs and symptoms of CRF—two years after completing their initial treatment (e18). Studies in other countries have yielded comparable findings (e19–e21).

Etiology and pathogenesis

All explanatory models of the causes and mechanisms of fatigue and exhaustion proceed from the assumption of a complex, multifactorial process. The causes and mechanisms of CRF may be associated with the tumor itself or with its treatment, or indeed with a potential genetic predisposition, an accompanying physical or mental illness, or behavioral and environmental factors (14, 15). Thus, a wide range of possible causes and influences—somatic, affective, cognitive, and psychosocial—that often cannot easily be separated from one another share cancer-related fatigue as a final common pathway. The following underlying pathophysiological factors are discussed in the literature:

• dysregulation of inflammatory cytokines (e22–e25),
• a disturbance of hypothalamic regulatory circuits (e26–e28),
• changes in the CNS serotoninergic system (e29, e30),
• a disturbance of circadian melatonin secretion and the sleep-wake rhythm (e31–e33), and
• gene polymorphisms for regulatory proteins of oxidative phosphorylation, signal transduction in B cells, the expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines, and catecholamine metabolism (e34–e37).

The causes of reduced physical performance ability, which is a common problem, are thought to lie in changes in the cortical and spinal sensorimotor centers (e38), in energy metabolism, and in the process of muscular activation (e39).

Diagnostic evaluation

According to the NCCN guideline, all cancer patients should be directly asked about symptoms of fatigue and exhaustion at regular intervals during their treatment and their further follow-up (2). The use of a visual analogue scale is recommended for recording the intensity of symptoms in the week leading up to the moment of inquiry (0 = no fatigue; 10 = worst fatigue you can imagine). A reported intensity of 4 or above is taken as the threshold value for further diagnostic assessment. The use of visual analogue scales is also recommended for assessing the degree to which CRF impairs the patient in various areas of everyday life; values of  5 and above are taken to imply a severe limitation of the patient’s social functioning that must be taken seriously (e40). If symptoms and signs suggesting CRF are, in fact, present, the further diagnostic assessment can be complicated by the following difficulties:

• The symptoms and signs of CRF are not specific, as they may also be due to other diseases or functional impairments.
• The clinical picture of CRF is defined solely by the affected patient’s subjective assessment of his or her symptoms and impairments.
• Persons with CRF often do not seem to be ill, even if CRF has severe effects on them.
• The type and extent of symptoms varies markedly from one patient to another and can change over time as well.
• There is no reliable laboratory test or functional study for CRF.

The complexity of this situation necessitates a deliberate and practically conceived approach whose main goal is to identify treatable causes and contributing factors (Figure 1).

Figure 1

Cancer-related fatigue: treatable causes and contributing factors (after Ref. [e81]).

History-taking plays a central role in the diagnostic process. The physician should ask specifically about the type, severity, and temporal course of the patient’s symptoms, paying attention to their possible relationship to vegetative functions (e.g. sleep pattern) and other factors such as the following:

• social and environmental factors
• medications (including self-administered ones)
• alcohol, tobacco, recreational drugs
• past medical history
• physical exercise.

The physician should also ask whether the symptoms are felt to be new or unusual. The history, in combination with the physical examination, can provide clues to possible causes or contributing factors (3) (Figure 2). If the history, physical examination, and basic laboratory tests yield no evidence of any underlying functional disturbance, further laboratory testing and ancillary studies are generally of little use. Therefore, according to the DEGAM guidelines, these should only be performed if the basic diagnostic assessment yields unequivocally abnormal findings (3).

Figure 2

Basic and detailed diagnostic assessment

With regard to the differential diagnosis of CRF, physicians are often faced with the important task of determining its possible relationship to a depressive disorder. The symptoms of fatigue and exhaustion have been found to be correlated with those of depressivity in nearly all studies that have addressed the question (8); this is hardly surprising, as easy fatigability and a lack of drive are considered to be among the main symptoms of depressive disorders. Nonetheless, according to the findings of two studies, only about one-third of persons suffering from severe CRF also have major depression, as defined by the DSM-IV (e41, e42). In clinical practice, a depressive disorder that may underlie CRF can be detected rapidly and sensitively with two questions (e43): If the patient answers both questions affirmatively, a depressive disorder is very likely to be present and therefore merits further, specialized diagnostic evaluation (Box 2).

Box 2

The two-question test for depressive disorders, to be administered during history-taking

Clinical experience with CRF patients indicates that many of them have no identifiable somatic or psychosocial cause for their symptoms. Physicians must beware of writing off the symptoms of CRF as “illegitimate” solely because of this. Rather, it is precisely this fact that makes it all the more important for the physician to take the patient’s symptoms and stresses seriously, and to show a readiness to talk about them and treat them. Repeated follow-up—even weeks or months after initial evaluation—often reveals additional information that may help establish or confirm a diagnosis (3).

Treatment

In most cases, CRF must be treated in the absence of a clearly diagnosed cause, but with the knowledge of a number of potential contributing factors (Figure 3). The treatment should be initiated early, to prevent CRF from turning into a chronic problem (e8). Multiple treatment approaches should be jointly applied, with an orientation toward the individual pattern of physical, mental, and cognitive symptoms, the extent of functional impairment, and the patient’s own conceptualization of the problem. The important persons in the patient’s life should also be included in treatment planning (e44).

Figure 3

Treatment algorithm

The central goals of treatment are:

• alleviating any factors that may be worsening the patient’s CRF,
• offering individualized help so that the patient can cope with the symptoms and stresses of CRF,
• activating the patient’s strengths and resources,
• and working toward a shared biopsychosocial conception of the situation that takes its many different aspects into account.

As as first step, the patient should be comprehensively informed about CRF and given appropriate counseling. Many patients are unaware that there is such a thing as CRF and cannot understand why they are so exhausted—especially if they seem to have achieved cure. Many patients find that the people around them cannot understand the problem either. Just knowing that their symptoms have a name and can be treated can give patients a large measure of emotional relief (e45). It is also important to tell patients that CRF need not have a bad outcome (e46). The physician can alleviate or prevent fears of prolonged and intractable fatigue by discussing CRF prophylactically before the treatment of the tumor is begun (e8).

All of the suggestions below for treating CRF with medications, or with non-pharmacological measures, are derived from randomized controlled trials and/or summaries of such trials in review articles and meta-analyses. They thus correspond to evidence levels 1 and 2 of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

Non-pharmacological treatments

There are many ways to alleviate the symptoms and stresses of CRF without recourse to medications.

The findings of two recent meta-analyses and numerous randomized controlled trials enable us to recommend certain specific psychosocial interventions and special types of physical exercise (16, 17).

Psychosocial interventions—The main interventions of this type that can alleviate CRF include cognitive behavioral therapeutic approaches (16, 17, e47); psychoeducation and directed, topical counseling (16, 17); energy conservation and activity management; and methods for the promotion and reinforcement of regeneration (17, e48, e49) (Table 1).

Table 1

Non-pharmacological treatments of CRF supported by evidence from systematic reviews (SR), meta-analyses (MA), and randomized controlled clinical trials (RCT)

While behavioral therapy (including cognitive behavioral therapy) and so-called mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) are specialized techniques that must be carried out by trained experts, the remaining interventions can be incorporated into routine general medical practice, as long as the necessary infrastructure is available.

Energy conservation and activity management are intended to help patients economize with their physical resources, e.g., by doing only the most important tasks themselves, resting at appropriate intervals, and planning time for pleasant diversions (e.g., going to the movies, meeting friends, or listening to music).

Psychoeducation and topical counseling are important elements of a supportive treatment plan. Directed cognitive behavioral therapeutic approaches have proven particularly useful (17, e47); the aim of such approaches is to illuminate the relationship of the physical symptoms with the way they are subjectively assessed (e.g., as “unpleasant” versus “catastrophic”), the resulting emotional states (e.g., worry versus despair), and patterns of behavior. Patients should be helped to understand that an appropriate assessment of the situation can improve their quality of life. Cognitive behavioral therapy and MBSR can also alleviate the hypersomnia and insomnia that often accompany CRF (2). In addition, they can equip the patient with ways to cope with the illness and the consequences of its treatment and limit emotional distress in the form of fears, mood shifts, and so forth.

Physical exercise—Strength and endurance training programs help the patient escape from the vicious circle of physical inactivity, deconditioning, and rapid exhaustion; they can be recommended to all patients with CRF (18, e50), as long as no contraindications are present (Box 3). The German Society for Sports Medicine and Prevention (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sportmedizin und Prävention) and the German Cancer Society (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft) have issued guidelines for training and exercise prorgrams for cancer patients (19).

Box 3

Calculation of the maximal heart rate, according to Lagerstrøm

Ideally, medically prescribed physical exercise sessions should take place several times per week, with daily endurance exercises and twice-weekly exercises to improve strength. Each training session should last 30 to 45 minutes (20) (Box 4). From the patient’s point of view, there are often multiple hindrances to the implementation of an ideal exercise program of this type, which should, in the best case, be continued for life: These include physical limitations, lack of interest, and purported lack of opportunity (e51). The physician should detect any such hindrances by directed history-taking and endeavor to overcome them with appropriate counseling or behavioral therapeutic approaches, so that physical exercise becomes a regular part of the patient’s daily routine. It is useful to encourage patients to do their own favorite types of physical exercise and to adapt the intensity and duration of each training session to their current capabilities and illness situation, with a gradual increase over four to six weeks (21). At the end of this period, the degree of physical exertion during exercise should not exceed 70% to 80% of the patient’s maximal capacity (maximal heart rate or maximal force). Strength training should generally take place in a facility where it can be overseen by a physical therapist or physician, while moderate endurance training can be introduced as part of routine clinical practice. Effective training involves elevating the heart rate to 70% to 80% of maximum. As a rule, exercise should not be so vigorous as to make the patient short of breath (22).

Box 4

Contraindications to exercise in patients with cancer

Pharmacotherapy

Medications with various mechanisms of action are used to treat CRF, including psychostimulants, phytotherapeutic agents, growth factors, corticosteroids, and antidepressants. Trials of antidepressants to date have not yielded any improvement in CRF (e52). It follows that these should be used only if there is clear evidence for, or a definitive diagnosis of, a depressive disorder.

In the following sections, we will discuss only those forms of treatment whose safety and efficacy have been studied in randomized controlled trials, corresponding to evidence levels 1 and 2 in the scheme of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (Table 2).

Table 2

Randomized controlled double-blind drug intervention trials showing efficacy against CRF as the primary endpoint

Hematopoietic growth factors—The administration of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) can relieve CRF in anemic patients undergoing chemotherapy (e53). The expected treatment effect is seen in only a minority of patients, as most patients with CRF are not anemic (e52, e54, e55). A meta-analysis of individual patient data indicated that the administration of ESA during chemotherapy is associated with higher mortality, and that ESA elevate the frequency of thrombotic and thromboembolic events (e56); thus, the benefits and risks of treating CRF with ESA must be critically weighed in every case (e57).

Psychostimulants—The psychostimulants methylphenidate (MP) and modafinil (MF) can relieve CRF (23–25). In Germany, these medications may only be given off-label, or in the setting of a clinical trial, to treat CRF. They are potentially useful especially for patients with severe CRF that has not responded satisfactorily to other forms of treatment. They can only be given in the absence of contraindications such as poorly controlled arterial hypertension, symptomatic coronary heart disease, arrhythmia, or epilepsy (for methylphenidate), or psychosis and severe affective disorders (for modafinil).

Methylphenidate has been found to relieve moderate-to-severe CRF significantly better than placebo in patients with advanced prostate cancer (e58) and gynecological tumors (e59) (Table 2). A retrospective analysis of trial data suggests that methylphenidate is most effective for patients with severe CRF; that the D-(+) form of methylphenidate is more effective than other forms; and that patients who already benefit from the drug in the first few days of treatment will benefit more from it overall (e60).

The findings of a recent study imply that modafinil is only effective against severe CRF (e61) (Table 2). In any case, in the past year, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has restricted its use to the treatment of adults with excessive sleepiness, because of the occurrence of psychiatric manifestations and cutaneous reactions (erythema multiforme, Stevens-Johnson syndrome).

Corticosteroids—In palliative situations, corticosteroids can temporarily improve CRF and increase patients’ physical activity (e62). Therefore, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) recommend considering corticosteroids for use in such situations, but for a limited time only, in view of the risk that steroid-induced myopathy might worsen CRF with prolonged use (2, 4).

Thyreoliberin—The findings of an initial randomized trial suggest that intravenously administered thyreoliberin (thyrotropin-releasing hormone [TRH]) may be a safe and effective way to treat CRF (e63). In this trial, the patients’ manifestations of exhaustion improved within a few hours of treatment, and the improvement was sustained for several days (Table 2). In Germany, however, TRH preparations are approved only for diagnostic purposes, not for treatment.

Phytotherapeutic agents—Ginseng is traditionally given to treat states of exhaustion of all kinds (e64). American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius) (e65) and Asian ginseng (Panax ginseng C.A. Meyer) (e66) have both been studied scientifically; the results permit the tentative conclusion that both may be effective against CRF (Table 2). In Germany, Panax ginseng preparations are approved for the treatment of states of exhaustion (e67).

Regarding the putative efficacy of guarana (Paullinia cupana), there is initial positive evidence from a randomized trial, in which guarana improved CRF in women undergoing chemotherapy for breast cancer (e68) (Table 2). The main active ingredient of guarana is caffeine; in the trial just cited, the dose of guarana that was given contained about the same amount of caffeine as two cups of strong coffee, but caffeine is said to be released more slowly from guarana than from coffee (e69).

Conflict of interest statement

Prof. Weis has received honoraria for lectures at symposia sponsored by the following pharmaceutical companies: Novartis, Roche, Astra Zeneca, and Ipsen.

PD Dr. Rüffer owns stock in Sanofi Aventis and serves as an advisor for Hexal.

PD Dr. Dimeo has received reimbursement of travel and accommodation expenses from Chugai and Amgen and lecture honoraria from Pfizer, Amgen, and Chugai. He has received money from Pfizer for a research project that he initiated.

Dr. Horneber has received lecture honoraria from Novartis.

Dr. Fischer states that she has no conflict of interest.

Manuscript submitted on 13 September 2011, revised version accepted on 5 December 2011.

Translated from the original German by Ethan Taub, M.D.

Corresponding author
Dr. med. Markus Horneber
Medizinische Klinik 5
Schwerpunkt Onkologie/Hämatologie
Klinikum Nürnberg
Prof.-Ernst-Nathan-Str. 1
90419 Nuremberg, Germany

@For eReferences please refer to:
www.aerzteblatt-international.de/0912

References

1. Weis J: Cancer-related fatigue: prevalence, assessment and treatment strategies. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2011; 11: 441–6.

2. Berger AM, Abernethy AP, Atkinson A, et al.: Cancer-related fatigue. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines TM) Version 1.2011

3. Donner-Banzhoff N, Maisel P, Dörr C, Baum E: Müdigkeit – DEGAM Leitlinie Nr. 2. AWMF Register Nr.053/002. Stand 2006. Göttingen, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Allgemeinmedizin und Familienmedizin (DEGAM).

4. Radbruch L, Strasser F, Elsner F, et al.: Fatigue in palliative care patients – an EAPC approach. Palliat Med 2008; 22: 13–32.

5. Scott JA, Lasch KE, Barsevick AM, Piault-Louis E: Patients’ experiences with cancer-related fatigue: a review and synthesis of qualitative research. Oncol Nurs Forum 2011; 38: 191–203.

6. Piper BF, Cella D: Cancer-related fatigue: definitions and clinical subtypes. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2010; 8: 958–66.

7. Ancoli-Israel S, Moore PJ, Jones V: The relationship between fatigue and sleep in cancer patients: a review. Eur J Cancer Care 2001; 10: 245–55.

8. Brown LF, Kroenke K: Cancer-related fatigue and its associations with depression and anxiety: a systematic review. Psychosomatics 2009; 50: 440–7.

9. Rüffer JU, Flechtner H, Tralls P, Josting A, Sieber M, Lathan B, et al.: Fatigue in long-term survivors of Hodgkin’s lymphoma; a report from the German Hodgkin Lymphoma Study Group (GHSG). Eur J Cancer 2003; 39: 2179–86.

10. Cheng KK, Lee DT: Effects of pain, fatigue, insomnia, and mood disturbance on functional status and quality of life of elderly patients with cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2011; 78: 127–37.

11. Vogelzang NJ, Breitbart W, Cella D, et al.: Patient, caregiver, and oncologist perceptions of cancer-related fatigue. Results of a tripart assessment survey. Semin Hematol 1997; 34: 4–12.

12. Newell S, Sanson-Fisher RW, Girgis A, Bonaventura A: How well do medical oncologists’ perceptions reflect their patients’ reported physical and psychosocial problems? Data from a survey of five oncologists. Cancer 1998; 83: 1640–51.

13. Singer S, Kuhnt S, Zwerenz R, et al.: Age- and sex-standardised prevalence rates of fatigue in a large hospital-based sample of cancer patients. Br J Cancer 2011; 105: 445–51.

14. Bruera E: Cancer-related fatigue: a multidimensional syndrome. J Support Oncol 2010; 8: 175–6.

15. Barsevick A, Frost M, Zwinderman A, Hall P, Halyard M: I’m so tired: biological and genetic mechanisms of cancer-related fatigue. Qual Life Res 2010; 19: 1419–27.

16. Kangas M, Bovbjerg DH, Montgomery GH: Cancer-related fatigue: a systematic and meta-analytic review of non-pharmacological therapies for cancer patients. Psychol Bull 2008; 134: 700–41.

17. Goedendorp MM, Gielissen MF, Verhagen CA, Bleijenberg G: Psychosocial interventions for reducing fatigue during cancer treatment in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; CD006953.

18. Dimeo FC: Effects of exercise on cancer-related fatigue. Cancer 2001; 92: 1689–93.

19. Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft: Richtlinien für die Anwendung von Sport und körperlicher Aktivität in der Prävention, supportiver Therapie und Rehabilitation neoplastischer Erkrankungen Teil II. FORUM 2011; 5: 9–12.

20. Dimeo F: Standards in der Sportmedizin: Körperliche Aktivität und Krebs. Zeitschrift für Sportmedizin 2004; 4: 106–7.

21. McNeely ML, Courneya KS: Exercise programs for cancer-related fatigue: evidence and clinical guidelines. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2010; 8: 945–53.

22. Baumann FT: Ausdauertraining mit Krebspatienten. In: Baumann FT, Schüle K, (eds.): Bewegungstherapie und Sport bei Krebs. Leitfaden für die Praxis. Köln: Deutscher Ärzte-Verlag GmbH; 2008: 33–55.

23. Breitbart W, Alici Y: Psychostimulants for cancer-related fatigue. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2010; 8: 933–42.

24. Minton O, Richardson A, Sharpe M, Hotopf M, Stone PC: Psychostimulants for the management of cancer-related fatigue: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Pain Symptom Manage 2011; 41: 761–7.

25. Cooper MR, Bird HM, Steinberg M: Efficacy and safety of modafinil in the treatment of cancer-related fatigue. Ann Pharmacother 2009; 43: 721–5.

e1. Holley S: Cancer-related fatigue. Suffering a different fatigue. Cancer Pract 2000; 8: 87–95.

e2. Tishelman C, Degner LF, Rudman A, et al.: Symptoms in patients with lung carcinoma: distinguishing distress from intensity. Cancer 2005; 104: 2013–21.

e3. Shi Q, Smith TG, Michonski JD, Stein KD, Kaw C, Cleeland CS: Symptom burden in cancer survivors 1 year after diagnosis: A Report from the american cancer society’s studies of cancer survivors. Cancer 2011; 117: 2779–90.

e4. Scott JA, Lasch KE, Barsevick AM, Piault-Louis E: Patients’ experiences with cancer-related fatigue: a review and synthesis of qualitative research. Oncol Nurs Forum 2011; 38: E191–E203.

e5. Gotay CC, Kawamoto CT, Bottomley A, Efficace F: The prognostic significance of patient-reported outcomes in cancer clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 1355–63.

e6. Montazeri A: Quality of life data as prognostic indicators of survival in cancer patients: an overview of the literature from 1982 to 2008. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2009; 7: 102.

e7. Servaes P, Gielissen MF, Verhagen S, Bleijenberg G: The course of severe fatigue in disease-free breast cancer patients: a longitudinal study. Psychooncology 2007; 16: 787–95.

e8. Kuhnt S, Ehrensperger C, Singer S, et al.: Prädiktoren tumorassoziierter Fatigue. Psychotherapeut 2011; 56: 216–23.

e9. Smith SK, Herndon JE, Lyerly HK, et al.: Correlates of quality of life-related outcomes in breast cancer patients participating in the Pathfinders pilot study. Psychooncology 2011; 20: 559–64.

e10. Spelten ER, Sprangers MA, Verbeek JH: Factors reported to influence the return to work of cancer survivors: a literature review. Psychooncology 2002; 11: 124–31.

e11. Tiedtke C, de Rijk A, Dierckx de Casterlé B, Christiaens MR, Donceel P: Experiences and concerns about ’returning to work’ for women breast cancer survivors: a literature review. Psychooncology 2010; 19: 677–83.

e12. Oktay JS, Bellin MH, Scarvalone S, Appling S, Helzlsouer KJ: Managing the impact of posttreatment fatigue on the family: Breast cancer survivors share their experiences. Fam Syst Health 2011; 29: 127–37.

e13. Shun SC, Lai YH, Hsiao FH: Patient-related barriers to fatigue communication in cancer patients receiving active treatment. Oncologist 2009; 14: 936–43.

e14. Westerman MJ, The AM, Sprangers MA, Groen HJ, van der Wal G, Hak T: Small-cell lung cancer patients are just ’a little bit’ tired: response shift and self-presentation in the measurement of fatigue. Qual Life Res 2007; 16: 853–61.

e15. Pearce S, Richardson A: Fatigue in cancer: a phenomenological perspective. Eur J Cancer Care 1996; 5: 111–5.

e16. Passik SD, Kirsh KL, Donaghy K, et al.: Patient-related barriers to fatigue communication: initial validation of the fatigue management barriers questionnaire. J Pain Symptom Manage 2002; 24: 481–93.

e17. Smets EM, Garssen B, Bonke B, de Haes JC: The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) psychometric qualities of an instrument to assess fatigue. J Psychosom Res 1995; 39: 315–25.

e18. Kuhnt S, Ernst J, Singer S, et al.: Fatigue in cancer survivors—prevalence and correlates. Onkologie 2009; 32: 312–7.

e19. Schultz SL, Dalton SO, Christensen J, Carlsen K, Ross L, Johansen C: Factors correlated with fatigue in breast cancer survivors undergoing a rehabilitation course, Denmark, 2002–2005. Psychooncology 2010; 20: 352–60.

e20. Cella D, Davis K, Breitbart W, Curt G: Cancer-related fatigue: prevalence of proposed diagnostic criteria in a United States sample of cancer survivors. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 3385–91.

e21. Knobel H, Havard LJ, Brit LM, Forfang K, Nome O, Kaasa S: Late medical complications and fatigue in Hodgkin’s disease survivors. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 3226–33.

e22. Bower JE, Ganz PA, Irwin MR, Kwan L, Breen EC, Cole SW: Inflammation and behavioral symptoms after breast cancer treatment: do fatigue, depression, and sleep disturbance share a common underlying mechanism? J Clin Oncol 2011; 29: 3517–22.

e23. Bower JE, Ganz PA, Aziz N, Olmstead R, Irwin MR, Cole SW: Inflammatory responses to psychological stress in fatigued breast cancer survivors: relationship to glucocorticoids. Brain Behav Immun 2007; 21: 251–8.

e24. Schubert C, Hong S, Natarajan L, Mills PJ, Dimsdale JE: The association between fatigue and inflammatory marker levels in cancer patients: a quantitative review. Brain Behav Immun 2007; 21: 413–27.

e25. Jager A, Sleijfer S, van der Rijt CC: The pathogenesis of cancer related fatigue: could increased activity of pro-inflammatory cytokines be the common denominator? Eur J Cancer 2008; 44: 175–81.

e26. Kamath J, Yarbrough GG, Prange AJ Jr., Winokur A: The thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH)-immune system homeostatic hypothesis. Pharmacol Ther 2009; 121: 20–8.

e27. Kamath J, Yarbrough GG, Prange AJ Jr., Winokur A: Thyrotropin-releasing hormone can relieve cancer-related fatigue: hypothesis and preliminary observations. J Int Med Res 2009; 37: 1152–7.

e28. Strasser F, Palmer JL, Schover LR, et al.: The impact of hypogonadism and autonomic dysfunction on fatigue, emotional function, and sexual desire in male patients with advanced cancer: a pilot study. Cancer 2006; 107: 2949–57.

e29. Bower JE: Cancer-related fatigue: links with inflammation in cancer patients and survivors. Brain Behav Immun 2007; 21: 863–71.

e30. Alexander S, Stone P, White S, Andrews P, Nussey S, Bano G: Evaluation of central serotonin sensitivity in breast cancer survivors with cancer-related fatigue syndrome. J Pain Symptom Manage 2010; 40: 892–8.

e31. Payne, JK: Altered Circadian Rhythms and Cancer-Related Fatigue Outcomes. Integr Cancer Ther 2011; 10(3): 221–233 doi: 10.1177/1534735410392581. Epub 2011 Mar 7

e32. Berger AM, Wielgus K, Hertzog M, Fischer P, Farr L: Patterns of circadian activity rhythms and their relationships with fatigue and anxiety/depression in women treated with breast cancer adjuvant chemotherapy. Support Care Cancer 2009; 18: 114.

e33. Rich TA: Symptom clusters in cancer patients and their relation to EGFR ligand modulation of the circadian axis. J Support Oncol 2007; 5: 167–74.

e34. Sprangers MA, Bartels M, Veenhoven R, et al.: Which patient will feel down, which will be happy? The need to study the genetic disposition of emotional states. Qual Life Res 2010; 19: 1429–37.

e35. Whistler T, Taylor R, Craddock RC, Broderick G, Klimas N, Unger ER: Gene expression correlates of unexplained fatigue. Pharmacogenomics 2006; 7: 395–405.

e36. Reinertsen KV, Grenaker Alnaes GI, Landmark-Hoyvik H, et al.: Fatigued breast cancer survivors and gene polymorphisms in the inflammatory pathway. Brain Behav Immun 2011; 25: 1376–83.

e37. Bower JE, Ganz PA, Irwin MR, Arevalo JM, Cole SW: Fatigue and gene expression in human leukocytes: increased NF-kappaB and decreased glucocorticoid signaling in breast cancer survivors with persistent fatigue. Brain Behav Immun 2011; 25: 147–50.

e38. Yavuzsen T, Davis MP, Ranganathan VK, et al.: Cancer-related fatigue: central or peripheral? J Pain Symptom Manage 2009; 38: 587–96.

e39. Ng AV: The underrecognized role of impaired muscle function in cancer-related fatigue. J Support Oncol 2010; 8: 177–8.

e40. Given B, Given CW, Sikorskii A, et al.: Establishing mild, moderate, and severe scores for cancer-related symptoms: how consistent and clinically meaningful are interference-based severity cut-points? J Pain Symptom Manage 2008; 35: 126–35.

e41. Andrykowski MA, Donovan KA, Laronga C, Jacobsen PB: Prevalence, predictors, and characteristics of off-treatment fatigue in breast cancer survivors. Cancer 2010; 116: 5740–8.

e42. Murphy H, Alexander S, Stone P: Investigation of diagnostic criteria for cancer-related fatigue syndrome in patients with advanced cancer: a feasibility study. Palliat Med 2006; 20: 413–8.

e43. Rudolf S, Bermejo I, Schweiger U, Hohagen F, Härter M: Diagnostik depressiver Störungen. Dtsch Arztebl 2006; 103: A 1754–62.

e44. Escalante CP, Kallen MA, Valdres RU, Morrow PK, Manzullo EF: Outcomes of a cancer-related fatigue clinic in a comprehensive cancer center. J Pain Symptom Manage 2010; 39: 691–701.

e45. Kuhnt S, Brähler E: Tumorassoziierte Fatigue. Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol 2010; 60: 402–8.

e46. Glaus A, Frei IA, Knipping C, Ream E, Browne N: Attitude of cancer patients to fatigue: patient attitude in Switzerland and England. Pflege 2002; 15: 187–94.

e47. Gielissen MF, Verhagen S, Witjes F, Bleijenberg G: Effects of cognitive behavior therapy in severely fatigued disease-free cancer patients compared with patients waiting for cognitive behavior therapy: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 4882–7.

e48. Barsevick AM, Dudley W, Beck S, Sweeney C, Whitmer K, Nail L: A randomized clinical trial of energy conservation for patients with cancer-related fatigue. Cancer 2004; 100: 1302–10.

e49. Yuen HK, Mitcham M, Morgan L: Managing post-therapy fatigue for cancer survivors using energy conservation training. J Allied Health 2006; 35: 121E–39E.

e50. Schmitz KH, Courneya KS, Matthews C, et al.: American college of sports medicine roundtable on exercise guidelines for cancer survivors. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2010; 42: 1409–26.

e51. Blaney J, Lowe-Strong A, Rankin J, Campbell A, Allen J, Gracey J: The cancer rehabilitation Journey: Barriers to and facilitators of exercise among patients with cancer-related fatigue. Phys Ther 2010; 90: 1135–47.

e52. Minton O, Stone P, Richardson A, Sharpe M, Hotopf M: Drug therapy for the management of cancer related fatigue. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; 7 (CD006704).

e53. Eton DT, Cella D: Do erythropoietic-stimulating agents relieve fatigue? A review of reviews. Cancer Treat Res 2011; 157: 181–94.

e54. Dimeo F, Schmittel A, Fietz T, et al.: Physical performance, depression, immune status and fatigue in patients with hematological malignancies after treatment. Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1237–42.

e55. Geinitz H, Zimmermann FB, Stoll P, et al.: Fatigue, serum cytokine levels, and blood cell counts during radiotherapy of patients with breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001; 51: 691–8.

e56. Bohlius J, Schmidlin K, Brillant C, et al.: Recombinant human erythropoiesis-stimulating agents and mortality in patients with cancer: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet 2009; 373: 1532–42.

e57. Rizzo JD, Brouwers M, Hurley P, et al.: American Society of Clinical Oncology/American Society of Hematology clinical practice guideline update on the use of epoetin and darbepoetin in adult patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28(33): 4996–5010.

e58. Roth AJ, Nelson C, Rosenfeld B, et al.: Methylphenidate for fatigue in ambulatory men with prostate cancer. Cancer 2010; 116: 5102–10.

e59. Lower EE, Fleishman S, Cooper A, et al.: Efficacy of dexmethyl-phenidate for the treatment of fatigue after cancer chemotherapy: a randomized clinical trial. J Pain Symptom Manage 2009; 38: 650–62.

e60. Yennurajalingam S, Palmer JL, Chacko R, Bruera E: Factors associated with response to methylphenidate in advanced cancer patients. Oncologist 2011; 16: 246–53.

e61. Jean-Pierre P, Morrow GR, Roscoe JA, et al.: A Phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, clinical trial of the effect of Modafinil on cancer-related fatigue among 631 patients receiving chemotherapy. Cancer 2010; 15: 3513–20.

e62. Lundholm K, Gelin J, Hyltander A, et al.: Anti-inflammatory treatment may prolong survival in undernourished patients with metastatic solid tumors. Cancer Res 1994; 54: 5602–6.

e63. Kamath J, Feinn R, Winokur A: Thyrotropin-releasing hormone as a treatment for cancer-related fatigue: a randomized controlled study. Support Care Cancer 2011.

e64. Jia L, Zhao Y: Current evaluation of the millennium phytomedicine—ginseng (I): etymology, pharmacognosy, phytochemistry, market and regulations. Curr Med Chem 2009; 16: 2475–84.

e65. Barton DL, Soori GS, Bauer BA, et al.: Pilot study of Panax quinquefolius (American ginseng) to improve cancer-related fatigue: a randomized, double-blind, dose-finding evaluation: NCCTG trial N03CA. Support Care Cancer 2010; 18: 179–87. (Epub 2009 May 6).

e66. Younus J, Collins A, Wang X, et al.: A double blind placebo controlled pilot study to evaluate the effect of ginseng on fatigue and quality of life in adult chemo-naïve cancer patients. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2003; 22: [abstr 2947].

e67. Fischer I, Boehm K, Horneber M, and CAM-Cancer Consortium. Ginseng [online document]. www.cam-cancer.org/CAM-Summaries/Biologically-Based-Practices/Ginseng. Last accessed on 12 July 2010.

e68. de Oliveira Campos MP, Riechelmann R, Martins LC, Hassan BJ, Casa FB, Giglio AD: Guarana (Paullinia cupana) Improves Fatigue in Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Systemic Chemotherapy. J Altern Complement Med 2011; 17: 505–12.

e69. Hänsel R, Sticher O: Pharmakognosie Phytopharmazie. 8 th edition. Heidelberg: Springer Medizin Verlag; 2007.

e70. Brown JC, Huedo-Medina TB, Pescatello LS, Pescatello SM, Ferrer RA, Johnson BT: Efficacy of Exercise interventions in modulating cancer-related fatigue among adult cancer survivors: A meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011; 20: 123–33. Epub 2010 Nov 4.

e71. Duijts SF, Faber MM, Oldenburg HS, van Beurden M, Aaronson NK: Effectiveness of behavioral techniques and physical exercise on psychosocial functioning and health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients and survivors—a meta-analysis. Psychooncology 2011; 20: 115–26.

e72. Velthuis MJ, Agasi-Idenburg SC, Aufdemkampe G, Wittink HM: The effect of physical exercise on cancer-related fatigue during cancer treatment: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2010; 22: 208–21.

e73. Dimeo F, Schwartz S, Wesel N, Voigt A, Thiel E: Effects of an endurance and resistance exercise program on persistent cancer-related fatigue after treatment. Ann Oncol 2008; 19: 1495–9.

e74. Dimeo FC, Stieglitz RD, Novelli-Fischer U, Fetscher S, Keul J: Effects of physical activity on the fatigue and psychologic status of cancer patients during chemotherapy. Cancer 1999; 85: 2273–7.

e75. Goedendorp MM, Gielissen MF, Verhagen CA, Bleijenberg G: Psychosocial interventions for reducing fatigue during cancer treatment in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; CD006953.

e76. Kangas M, Bovbjerg DH, Montgomery GH: Cancer-related fatigue: a systematic and meta-analytic review of non-pharmacological therapies for cancer patients. Psychol Bull 2008; 134: 700–41.

e77. van der Lee ML, Garssen B: Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy reduces chronic cancer-related fatigue: a treatment study. Psycho-oncology 2010 Dec 19 [Epub ahead of print].

e78. Dimeo FC, Thomas F, Raabe-Menssen C, Propper F, Mathias M: Effect of aerobic exercise and relaxation training on fatigue and physical performance of cancer patients after surgery. A randomised controlled trial. Support Care Cancer 2004; 12: 774–9.

e79. Carlson LE, Garland SN: Impact of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) on sleep, mood, stress and fatigue symptoms in cancer outpatients. Int J Behav Med 2005; 12: 278–85.

e80. Dimeo FC: Bewegung im eigenen Takt – Körperliche Aktivität und Sport bei Tumorerkrankungen. Im Focus Onkologie 2010; 5: 60–6.

e81. Mortimer JE, Barsevick AM, Bennett CL, et al.: Studying cancer-related fatigue: Report of the NCCN Scientific Research Committee. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2010; 8: 1331–9.