Physical and occupational rehabilitation during active glioma treatment

Evidence label: Underpowered randomized trial with negative primary quality-of-life result · Clinical goal: support quality of life and function during active anticancer treatment

Evidence at a glance

Population: 64 functionally independent people with glioma; 32 were randomized to each group.
Intervention: supervised physical- and occupational-therapy rehabilitation during active treatment, compared with usual rehabilitation care.
Result: the primary global quality-of-life difference was 8.7 points, but its confidence interval crossed no effect.

What was studied

The single-blind trial planned for 88 participants per group but enrolled 64 total. Global health status/quality of life at six weeks was primary. Other quality-of-life domains, symptoms and objective functional performance were secondary.

What the evidence shows

The adjusted primary difference was 8.7 points (95% CI −4.36 to 21.79), which was not statistically significant. Several secondary measures favored rehabilitation, including self-rated cognitive function and fatigue and measured aerobic power, but these signals need confirmation.

Rehabilitation may still be clinically appropriate for individual deficits. This trial did not establish a broad quality-of-life benefit and did not test tumor control or survival.

Limits and uncertainty

Enrollment was far below the prespecified target and follow-up was short. Participants were functionally independent, so findings may not generalize to people with major neurologic disability. Multiple secondary outcomes raise the chance of positive findings by chance.

Safety and practical context

Glioma can cause seizures, weakness, balance problems, cognitive change and steroid-related muscle loss. Programs require neurologic and falls-risk assessment. New seizures, worsening weakness, severe headache or abrupt cognitive change needs urgent clinical review.

Questions for the care team

Which neurologic or daily-living problem is rehabilitation targeting?
Do seizures, balance or steroid effects require one-to-one supervision?
How will we distinguish a meaningful functional gain from a questionnaire change?

Sources

Literature searched: October 22, 2026 · Record appraised: October 22, 2026

Educational evidence summary, not personal medical advice. Research regimens describe what was studied; they are not personal prescribing instructions and should not replace cancer treatment or individualized supportive care.