Associations Between Physical Activity Measurement Modality and Gut Microbiome in Breast Cancer Survivors
9 affiliations
- 1Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA
- 2Department of Kinesiology, Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA
- 3Department of Hematology Oncology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA
- 4Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60607, USA
- 5Department of Computer Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA
- 6Markey Cancer Center, Department of Microbiology, Immunology, and Molecular Genetics, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, USA
- 7Department of Nutrition Sciences, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA
- 8Department of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA
- 9Department of Psychology, Koç University, Istanbul 34450, Turkey
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Physical activity (PA), physiological fitness, and the gut microbiome have each been linked to health outcomes among breast cancer survivors (BCS); however, these associations have been inconsistent. Few studies have directly compared the associations of self-reported PA, accelerometer-derived PA, and physiological fitness with the gut microbiome within the same population. This study evaluated whether associations with gut microbiome outcomes vary by PA and fitness measurement modality in post-primary treatment BCS. Methods: Baseline data from 69 BCS enrolled in a randomized controlled trial were analyzed. PA was assessed using self-reported moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) and accelerometer-derived light PA (LPA), MVPA, and sedentary behaviors. Physiological fitness was evaluated using peak oxygen uptake (V˙O2peak) and related fitness metrics. Gut microbiome outcomes included α-diversity, β-diversity, and exploratory taxa-level analyses derived from 16S rRNA sequencing. Associations were evaluated using correlation and regression analyses, with adjustment for relevant clinical covariates. Results: Accelerometer-derived PA, particularly MVPA, demonstrated the strongest and most consistent associations with α-diversity and β-diversity, whereas physiological fitness measures showed only weak associations. Sedentary behavior was inversely associated with both diversity metrics, while self-reported MVPA was not associated with diversity indices. Medication burden and comorbidity status attenuated several PA-microbiome associations, and no taxa-level associations remained significant after correction for multiple testing. Conclusions: Associations between PA, fitness, and gut microbiome outcomes varied according to measurement modality. Accelerometer-derived MVPA demonstrated more consistent associations with microbiome diversity and composition than self-reported MVPA or physiological fitness. Future studies should incorporate multiple complementary measures of PA and fitness when examining PA–microbiome relationships.
Related
- Associations of Self-Reported Physical Activity with Gut Microbial Diversity and Community Structure in Young, Apparently Healthy Korean Men.
- Beyond associations: methodological and conceptual challenges in diet–microbiome research for cardiometabolic risk
- Longitudinal associations of the gut microbiome with arterial stiffness in US adults: findings from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging
- Extremophyte-derived exosome-like nanovesicles remodel intestinal barrier dysfunction by multi-dimensional intervention: physical barrier repair with immune homeostasis and microbiome regulation
- Prevotella stercorea links gut microbiome ecology to respiratory infection protection through host-context-dependent, richness-independent associations
BibTeX
@article{neal2026associations,
title = {{Associations Between Physical Activity Measurement Modality and Gut Microbiome in Breast Cancer Survivors}},
author = {Whitney N. Neal and Keri M. Kemp and Rebecca B. Little and Stephen J. Carter and Erica A. Schleicher and Robert W. Motl and Jin Lu and Elliot J. Lefkowitz and Robert A. Oster and Lyse A. Norian and Gary R. Hunter and Helen Krontiras and Bulent Turan and Laura Q. Rogers},
journal = {Nutrients},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3390/nu18193286},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13667220},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Associations Between Physical Activity Measurement Modality and Gut Microbiome in Breast Cancer Survivors
AU - Whitney N. Neal
AU - Keri M. Kemp
AU - Rebecca B. Little
AU - Stephen J. Carter
AU - Erica A. Schleicher
AU - Robert W. Motl
AU - Jin Lu
AU - Elliot J. Lefkowitz
AU - Robert A. Oster
AU - Lyse A. Norian
AU - Gary R. Hunter
AU - Helen Krontiras
AU - Bulent Turan
AU - Laura Q. Rogers
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/01
JO - Nutrients
DO - 10.3390/nu18193286
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13667220
AB - Background/Objectives: Physical activity (PA), physiological fitness, and the gut microbiome have each been linked to health outcomes among breast cancer survivors (BCS); however, these associations have been inconsistent. Few studies have directly compared the associations of self-reported PA, accelerometer-derived PA, and physiological fitness with the gut microbiome within the same population. This study evaluated whether associations with gut microbiome outcomes vary by PA and fitness measurement modality in post-primary treatment BCS. Methods: Baseline data from 69 BCS enrolled in a randomized controlled trial were analyzed. PA was assessed using self-reported moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) and accelerometer-derived light PA (LPA), MVPA, and sedentary behaviors. Physiological fitness was evaluated using peak oxygen uptake (V˙O2peak) and related fitness metrics. Gut microbiome outcomes included α-diversity, β-diversity, and exploratory taxa-level analyses derived from 16S rRNA sequencing. Associations were evaluated using correlation and regression analyses, with adjustment for relevant clinical covariates. Results: Accelerometer-derived PA, particularly MVPA, demonstrated the strongest and most consistent associations with α-diversity and β-diversity, whereas physiological fitness measures showed only weak associations. Sedentary behavior was inversely associated with both diversity metrics, while self-reported MVPA was not associated with diversity indices. Medication burden and comorbidity status attenuated several PA-microbiome associations, and no taxa-level associations remained significant after correction for multiple testing. Conclusions: Associations between PA, fitness, and gut microbiome outcomes varied according to measurement modality. Accelerometer-derived MVPA demonstrated more consistent associations with microbiome diversity and composition than self-reported MVPA or physiological fitness. Future studies should incorporate multiple complementary measures of PA and fitness when examining PA–microbiome relationships.
SN - 2072-6643
ER -