Improving Sleep in Lung Cancer Patients: A Trial of Aerobic Exercise and Tai-chi

Lung cancer is one of the commonest cancers around the world. Sleep disturbances are commonly reported by lung cancer patients. Meanwhile, disturbed sleep is associated with several health problems, including shortened survival period. Thus, lung cancer imposes a substantial health burden on patients and society both locally and world widely. On top of the classical clinical therapies, additional approaches that could result in improved sleep are needed. Previous studies, including our own, have shown that physical exercise, such as aerobic walking, improves lung cancer patient's physical fitness particularly cardiovascular fitness, circadian rhythm and immune function. Another popular mode of exercise in Chinese population is tai-chi. With emphasis on breathing and concentration, tai-chi exhibits extra benefits for stress-relieving and psychological well-being. Those benefits of exercise have long been implicated for better sleep of cancer patients. The promising benefits of aerobic exercise or tai-chi, as non-pharmacological interventions, urge for need of rigorous evidence on the effectiveness of these interventions in improving sleep outcomes. However, to date, there has been no report from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to study the effect of aerobic exercise or tai-chi on sleep of lung cancer patients. This proposed research is designed to conduct a three-arm RCT comparing aerobic exercise, tai-chi to usual care in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Recruited participants will be randomised into three groups: 1) a 16-week aerobic exercise group, 2) a 16-week tai-chi program group, and 3) a self-management control group. Aerobic exercise and tai-chi program will be conducted by certificated coaches. Life-long adherence to the practice in intervention groups is encouraged. Through this project, the investigators aim to evaluate if 1) aerobic exercise or 2) tai-chi intervention promote subjective sleep quality in lung cancer patients compared to control