AzTrials
AzTrials

Non-Small Cell Lung CancerSing-a-Lung 2NCT07460999

Singing Training vs Usual Care 6-18 Months After Surgical Resection for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)

A study testing Singing training (Singing for Lung Health (SLH)) in people with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease, run by Zealand University Hospital at 5 sites in Denmark.

Recruiting

Looking for participants now. Contact the study team or a site below to ask about taking part.

Sites and contacts
Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

People who have undergone curative surgery for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) often experience reduced quality of life (QoL), a high burden of symptoms, and physical deconditioning. Current Danish rehabilitation offers are heterogeneous and inconsistent and not tailored to the specific needs of this population. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
What is being tested?
Singing training (Singing for Lung Health (SLH))
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
100 participants
Where
5 sitesDenmark
Study dates
1 Mar 2026to 1 Oct 2027
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Not yet: the study is under way

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Patients who display persistent symptoms 6-18 months (+/- one month) after surgical resection of localised lung cancer with video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS) will be invited to participate in the study.
  • Persistent symptoms, i.e., an EORTC-QLQ-C30 symptom domain score (in any item) of ≥2 (="clinically relevant symptom or problem that should have healthcare professional attention"),
  • Surgery for stage I lung cancer 6-18 months (+/- one month) earlier,
  • Motivated for participating in the project (and acceptance of randomisation procedure),
  • Access to a computer or a tablet with internet access,
  • Ability to speak and understand Danish,
  • Acceptance of the scheduled times of the singing intervention twice a week.

Who cannot join

  • Unstable coronary diseases,
  • Severe cognitive disabilities (e.g., dementia),
  • Indication for adjuvant chemotherapy or other antineoplastic therapy,
  • Signs of lung cancer recurrence at regular follow-up CT scan.
  • No previous singing experience or musical competence is required. Participants will be informed that they are allowed to participate in additional offer of structured or unstructured offer physical exercise training and/or singing along with the project.

Trial locations and contacts

5 sites in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.

Mette Kaasgaard, PhD contact

4528940238

mkaasgaard@health.sdu.dk

Uffe Bødtger, PhD contact

4526791426

ubt@regionsjaelland.dk

5 sites in 1 country

Denmark5 sites, 5 recruiting
  • August Krogh Section for Molecular and Human Physiology, Department of Nutrition, Exercise, and Sports, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen

    Copenhagen, 2100

    Morten Hostrup, Associate Professor, PhD, MSc, MD, +4524474785, mhostrup@nexs.ku.dk

    Recruiting
  • Department of Respiratory Medicine, Bispebjerg Hospital

    Copenhagen, 2400

    Anne Orholm Nielsen, PhD, MD, +4521547350, anne.orholm.nielsen@regionh.dk

    Recruiting
  • Department of Medicine Roskilde and Næstved, Zealand University Hospital

    Næstved, 4700

    Uffe Bødtger, Professor, PhD, MD, 24791426, ubt@regionsjaelland.dk

    Recruiting
  • Department of Respiratory Medicine, Odense University Hospital

    Odense, 5000

    Christian Borbjerg Laursen, Professor, PhD, MD, +4540383944, christian.b.laursen@rsyd.dk

    Recruiting
  • Department of Respiratory Medicine, Lillebaelt Hospital

    Vejle, 7100

    Ole Hilberg, Professor, DMSc, +4520878694, ole.hilberg@rsyd.dk

    Recruiting

Other trials in Denmark

About this study

Official title: Effects and Mechanisms of Online Delivered Singing Training vs Usual Care in Patients With Persistent Symptoms 6-18 Months After Surgical Resection for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) - a Multi-centre RCT

People who have undergone curative surgery for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) often experience reduced quality of life (QoL), a high burden of symptoms, and physical deconditioning. Current Danish rehabilitation offers are heterogeneous and inconsistent and not tailored to the specific needs of this population. Additionally, some patients continue to suffer from persistent physical symptoms months or even years after surgery, yet no targeted support is currently available for them. Singing - delivered as a structured form of training - has shown benefits in improving both physical and psychological outcomes in individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Although singing has not yet been studied in NSCLC patients, the two conditions share overlapping symptoms and characteristics. Therefore, the present study aims to explore whether a singing-based intervention can help reduce symptom burden and improve physical function and QoL in NSCLC patients 6 to 18 months post-surgery. To test this, a multi-centre randomised controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted, comparing a singing intervention to usual care. Given that travel and distance often pose significant barriers to participation, the intervention will be delivered online.

Read the detailed description

Post-surgical rehabilitation should include combined aerobic training and strength training, alone or combined with respiratory muscle training. A Cochrane review (Cavalheri, et al., 2019) concluded that rehabilitation with exercise training improved physical capacity and physical fitness and suggested improved Health-Related QoL and dyspnoea. Additionally, a Core Outcomes Set (Edbrooke, et al., 2025) defined critical outcomes as: physical function, HRQoL, breathlessness, activities of daily living, emotional and mental well-being, pain.

In a recent Danish mapping study (Kaasgaard, et al., 2024), a large proportion experiences physiological-oriented symptoms: Fatigue (78%), hyper-vigilance (74%), dyspnoea (65%), and pain (47%); besides psychological-oriented symptoms: Worry about the future (40%), depression (35%), and anxiety (29%). In addition, 27%, experienced having vocal problems. This was confirmed in a subsequent Danish cross-sectional study, which specifically found impaired QoL (physical functioning) and symptoms (dyspnoea) 6-12 months after NSCLC surgery. This aligns with other recent Danish studies demonstrating persistent symptoms long-term after NSCLC surgery. In addition, a systematic review found poor mental health-related QoL, dyspnoea, and pain up to one year after surgery. Taken together, this implies signs of a neglected population with persistent symptoms, yet without a standard offer available to support them.

Singing has become increasingly popular in respiratory diseases, comprising elements of both physiological training and psychosocial aspects, therefore, likely to address the unmet needs in lung cancer. Previous studies have suggested physiological training effects and increased respiratory control, less dyspnoea, improved QoL, and reduced anxiety and depression. Moreover, singing is suggested to confer physiological training effects with work load equivalent to brisk walk pace. Furthermore, singing is perceived as a relevant and beneficial activity that builds joy, meaning, and social cohesion. However, studies have overall mostly been small and heterogenous, and with contradictory findings and a lack of knowledge about the underpinning mechanisms. Moreover, there are different approaches to singing, although a conventional choir approach is mainly adapted. The currently most well-documented, best-practice disease-specific approach is Singing for Lung Health (SLH), developed within a multidisciplinary healthcare setting in the UK since 2008. SLH aims to provide health-promoting benefits, uses exercises and songs as tools for purpose, and, further, includes movement and dancing while singing. In a recent multicentre-RCT in COPD - Sing-a-Lung 1.0 -, the study investigators demonstrated that PR with SLH improved functional capacity and QoL in a dose-response manner and was non-inferior to PR with usual care delivery of physical exercise. Furthermore, SLH was related to improved respiratory strength and dyspnoea control. This RCT was conducted within a real-life community-based setting, was the largest study so far, had sufficient power to detect change (n=270), and, thus, represents a proof-of-concept study.

Singing has not yet been investigated in lung cancer, but a qualitative study exploring singing for patients with breast or colorectal cancer suggests that singing may improve resilience, confidence, and mood, and builds social support. However, given that several epidemiological and common pathogenetic factors are shared between chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and NSCLC patients, results from Sing-a-Lung 1.0 are likely to be transferrable specifically to people with lung cancer, and may address important needs of this overlooked group. However, the limited number of lung cancer patients in each municipality and the heterogeneity of current rehabilitation compromise the feasibility of an RCT equally to the one of Sing-a-Lung 1.0. Therefore, as it is expected that the patients will benefit from a singing intervention, singing will be compared with usual care. The singing intervention will be delivered online across all study sites, using video conferencing application, and delivered by three specialised singing teachers. Specifically, the study aims to investigate whether 10 weeks' online singing training (delivered as SLH) improves key physiological and psychosocial outcomes, and reduces symptom burden compared to usual care 6-18 months after curative intended NSCLC surgery, hypothesising that 1) SLH provides relevant and beneficial improvements in both physiological and psychological parameters (superior to usual care alone), and 2) SLH relieves symptom burden (superior to usual care alone). In an exploratory study of a sub-cohort, the study aims to investigate the underpinning mechanisms of singing compared to usual care, hypothesising that 3) SLH improves physical fitness, oxygenation, and inflammation. The overall project will run between Q3 2025 and Q4 2028. Intervention phase: Q1 2026 to Q3 2027. Recruitment and data collection at the following sites: Site 1) Dept. of Medicine, Zealand University Hospital, Roskilde and Næstved, Næstved Hospital, Ringstedgade 61, DK-4700 Naestved, Denmark; Site 2) Dept. of Respiratory Medicine, Bispebjerg Hospital, Bispebjerg Bakke 23, DK-2400, København NV, Denmark; Site 3) Dept. of Respiratory Medicine, Lillebaelt Hospital, Vejle, Kabbeltoft 25, DK-7100 Vejle, Denmark; Site 4) Dept. of Respiratory Medicine, Odense University Hospital, J. B. Winsløws Vej 4, DK-5000 Odense, Denmark. Specifically, recruitment at Site 2 (or from Site 1 if living close to Copenhagen): Data collection (both for the main study and exploratory sub-study) at site 5) August Krogh Sect. for Molecular and Human Physiology, Dept. of Nutrition, Exercise University of Copenhagen, and Sports, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Universitetsparken 3, DK-2100 København Ø, Denmark. Participants will be recruited using the following methods: 1) Retrospectively: Participants from the recent cross-sectional study, conducted at Site 1 and 2 (Kaasgaard, et al., in peer-review) who indicated to be interested in being part of the study; 2) Retrospectively: Patient lists from the Danish Lung Cancer Registry (DLCR); 3) Prospectively: Ongoing identification in follow-up consultation. Included study participants will be block randomised to either: Group 1: 10 weeks' online SLH, or Group 2: 10 weeks' usual care (followed by an offer of 10 weeks' online SLH). Study participants will be assessed at the following time points: Group 1: 1) T0: Baseline (at randomisation); 2) T1: Follow-up 11-14 weeks later). Group 2: 1) T0: Baseline (at randomisation); 2) T1: Follow-up 11-14 weeks later); 3) T2: Follow-up: Withing three weeks after the SLH intervention (appr. 11-14 weeks after T1). Primary study outcome: Change in physical capacity, assessed with the Six Minute Walking Test (6MWT). An a priori statistical power analysis calculation showed that the needed sample size is n=78 study participants and including an expected drop-out-rate of 20%, an overall total sample of n=100 study participants is needed. In the power analysis, the investigators considered data from previous studies on the primary study outcome, 6MWT distance, with a minimal important difference of ≥ 30 m, with the final calculation based on findings from our previous RCT on singing for COPD with a pre-post difference of mean 13.1±36.3 m after 10 weeks of singing in PR for COPD. Statistical power analysis calculations (primary study outcome: 6MWD): Estimated sample size for two-sample comparison of means: Test H0: n1 = n2, where n1 is the mean in population 1 and n2 is the mean in population 2. Assumptions: α (two-tailed) 0.05, β 0.2; Effect size Group 1: 15 m; Group 2: 5 m (SD 15). Estimated required sample sizes (based on power: 80 %): n1 = 52; n2 = 26

Being tested
Singing training (Singing for Lung Health (SLH)), Control group: Usual care
Keywords
lung cancer, rehabilitation, singing, online training, physical capacity, quality of life, symptom burden, airway physiology, physiology, six-minute walk test
Medical subject headings
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung, Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Lung Neoplasms

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Singing training (Singing for Lung Health (SLH))Behavioural

    10 weeks of singing training (conducted according to the Singing for Lung Health (SLH) approach). The singing training will be delivered online (1 1/2 hour twice a week) by professional singing teachers specifically trained and experienced within SLH. Sessions include physical, vocal, and breathing exercises and musical repertoire. Besides, movement, dancing, and artefacts for playful games are included along with singing. Each session consists of 20 min physical warm-ups, 20 min vocal warm-up with rhythm and pitch games, 40 min singing (incl. break), and 10 min cool-down.

  • Control group: Usual careBehavioural

    The control group will receive usual care, i.e., no specific additional intervention above those which the person usually engages with.

Study groups in NCT07460999
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Intervention: Singing training (Singing for Lung Health (SLH))Experimental10 weeks of singing training (conducted according to the Singing for Lung Health (SLH) approach). The singing training will be delivered online (1 1/2 hour twice a week) by professional singing teachers specifically trained and experienced within SLH. Sessions include physical, vocal, and breathing exercises and musical repertoire. Besides, movement, dancing, and artefacts for playful games are included along with singing. Each session consists of 20 min physical warm-ups, 20 min vocal warm-up with rhythm and pitch games, 40 min singing (incl. break), and 10 min cool-down. Participants are allowed to participate in additional offer of structured or unstructured offer physical exercise training and/or singing along with the project.
Receives: Behavioral: Singing training (Singing for Lung Health (SLH))
Control group: 1) Usual care, followed by Singing training (Singing for Lung Health (SLH))Other10 weeks of usual care (i.e., no specific additional intervention above those which the person usually engages with), followed by 10 weeks of singing training (conducted according to the Singing for Lung Health (SLH) approach). The singing training will be delivered online (1 1/2 hour twice a week) by professional singing teachers specifically trained and experienced within SLH. Sessions include physical, vocal, and breathing exercises and musical repertoire. Besides, movement, dancing, and artefacts for playful games are included along with singing. Each session consists of 20 min physical warm-ups, 20 min vocal warm-up with rhythm and pitch games, 40 min singing (incl. break), and 10 min cool-down. Participants are allowed to participate in additional offer of structured or unstructured offer physical exercise training and/or singing along with the project.
Receives: Behavioral: Singing training (Singing for Lung Health (SLH)); Behavioral: Control group: Usual care

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Change in Physical capacity

    Assessed with the Six Minute Walking Test (6MWT) (assessor-collected) , measured in meters walked in 6 minutes. Minimal important difference: >30 m.

    Measured: Changes pre-post 10 weeks (measured at all assessment points).

  2. Perceived exertion

    Measured using BORG CR-10 dyspnoea scale (self-reported). The scale ranges from 0 to 10 points, where 0 represents no exertion/dyspnoea and 10 represents maximal exertion/dyspnoea. Minimal important difference: 1 point.

    Measured: Changes measured before and after performance of 6MWT; Changes pre-post 10 weeks (measured at all assessment points).

  3. Change in Health-related quality of life (HRQoL)

    St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) (self-reported questionnaire). SGRQ has 50 items with 76 weighted responses and four scores: Total, Symptom, Activity, Impact. Each score ranges from 0 to 100, with 100 representing worst possible health status and 0 best possible. Minimal important differnence: -4 units.

    Measured: Changes pre-post 10 weeks (measured at all assessment points).

Secondary outcomes (12)
  1. Change in Quality of life

    EORTC 30 item Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30), v. 3.0 (self-reported questionnaire). Functional domains: Physical function, role functioning, emotional function, cognitive function, social function. QLQ-C30 has 30 items: 1-28 completed on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all, 2=a little, 3=quite a bit, and 4=very much); 29-30 completed on a 7-point scale defined by extremes (1=very poor, 7=excellent). Raw and transformed scores are calculated, based on instructions in the QLQ-C30 scoring manual. Calculated scores range: 0-100. For the Functional scale, 100 = highest possible level of functioning. Cutoffs for clinically important problems: based on EORTC Quality of Life Group (Physical functioning (≤83), role functioning (≤58), emotional functioning (≤71), cognitive functioning (≤75), social functioning (≤58))

    Measured: Pre-post 10 weeks

  2. Change in Symptoms burden

    EORTC 30 item Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30), v. 3.0 (self-reported). Symptom domains: Fatigue, nausea/vomiting, pain, sleep disturbances, dyspnoea, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial concerns. QLQ-C30 has 30 items: For 1-28: 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all, 2=a little, 3=quite a bit, 4=very much); for 29-30: 7-point scale defined by extremes (1=very poor, 7=excellent). Raw and transformed scores are calculated, based on the QLQ-C30 scoring manual. Calculated scores range: 0-100. For the Symptom scale, 100 = highest possible symptom burden. Cutoffs for clinically important problems: EORTC Quality of Life Group: Fatigue (≥39), nausea/vomiting (≥8), pain (≥25), insomnia (≥50), dyspnoea (≥17), appetite loss (≥50), constipation (≥50), diarrhea (≥17), financial concerns (≥17). Danish Multi-disciplinary Cancer Groups: ≥2 = "clinically relevant symptom"; ≥3 = "severe/serious symptom" (pain, dyspnoea, nausea/vomiting: ≥2 = "severe/serious symptom").

    Measured: Changes pre-post 10 weeks (measured at all assessment points).

  3. Change in symptoms burden

    EORTC Quality of Life Lung Cancer Module Questionnaire (QLQ-LC13) is a supplementary lung cancer-specific questionnaire to be used in conjunction with the QLQ-C30. Both questionnaires developed and validated in patients with lung cancer (self-reported). The module consists of 13 items and comprises multi- and single-item measures of lung cancer-associated symptoms (i.e. coughing, haemoptysis, dyspnoea and pain). Scaling of items: 1 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). Scoring: 0 to 100. (higher scores = increasing symptom levels. Minimal important difference not defined.

    Measured: Changes pre-post 10 weeks (measured at all assessment points).

  4. Change in symptoms burden: Dyspnoea

    mMRC (Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale) (self-reported). The scale includes scores from 0-4, with grade 0 corresponding to "Dyspnoea only when strenuous exercise" and grade 4 corresponding to "Too dyspneic to leave house or breathless when dressing. Minimal important difference: 1 point.

    Measured: Changes pre-post 10 weeks (measured at all assessment points).

  5. Change in symptoms burden: Breathing vigilance

    The Breathing Vigilance Questionnaire (Breathe-VQ) quantifies breathing vigilance in individuals with respiratory diseases and dysfunctional breathing (self-reported). The questionnaire utilises a 5 point Likert scale (1 = "never" to 5 = "always"), with a brief introductory text followed by instructions for scoring 1. Respondents select the response that best describes their typical breathing perceptions, and higher scores indicates higher levels of breathing vigilance. Minimal important difference has not yet been defined.

    Measured: Changes pre-post 10 weeks (measured at all assessment points).

  6. Change in symptoms of anxiety and depression

    Assessed with Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) (self-reported). HADS comprises 14 items, seven related to anxiety and seven related to depression. Minimal important difference: 1.32 (anxiety component) and 1.40 (depression component).

    Measured: Changes pre-post 10 weeks (measured at all assessment points).

  7. Change in airway physiology

    Reversibility test using a spirometer (assessor-collected): FEV1 in litres and % predicted, FVC in litres and % predicted, FEV1%/FVC%. Values will be categorised according to Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD): FEV1% > 80 = GOLD 1 (mild); 50 ≤ FEV1% < 80 = GOLD 2 (moderate); 30 ≤ FEV1% < 50 = GOLD 3 (severe); FEV1% < 30 = GOLD 4 (very severe). Reference values: height, age, sex and ethnicity. Minimal important difference for FEV1 is considered to be 120 ml.

    Measured: Changes pre-post 10 weeks (measured at all assessment points).

  8. Change in aerobic fitness/Maximal oxygen uptake

    VO2-max (test for VO2 max estimate; 70% of maximum heart rate for 20 minutes continuously). Women: 4-minute warm-up at 10 W, followed by an incremental ramp test with a workload increase of 10 W·min-¹. Men: 4-minute warm-up at 15 W, followed by an incremental ramp test with a workload increase of 15 W·min-¹.

    Criteria for Exhaustion: Respiratory exchange ratio (RER) ≥ 1.10; Cadence < 70 rpm despite verbal encouragement. Analysis: VO₂peak defined as the highest 30-second averaged VO₂ value obtained during the test; Incremental peak power output (iPPO) defined as the peak workload attained during the ramp test. Units of measure: Absolute VO₂peak: ml O2/min; Relative VO₂peak: ml O2/min/kg; iPPO: W.

    Measured: Changes pre-post 10 weeks (measured at all assessment points).

  9. Change in inspiratory and expiratory pressure

    Maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressure (MIP and MEP), measured in cm H2O.

    Measured: Pre-post VO2 max test; pre-post 10 weeks (at all assessment points)

  10. Change in Heart rate

    Maximum pulse and recovery after 6MTW. Minimal important difference is considered as a 10% change.

    Measured: Changes pre-post 10 weeks (measured at all assessment points).

  11. Adherence and drop-out

    Continuously registered by the singing teachers and study nurses. Adherence rate will be divided into four categories (quartiles) with high adherence = ≥75% of all sessions.

    Measured: Registred during and after 10 weeks (at all assessment points).

  12. Adverse events

    Any adverse events (adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE)).

    Measured: Post 10 weeks (registered at assessment point 2 (and 3 for Group 2).

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted10 Mar 2026
  2. Study start1 Mar 2026
  3. Primary completion1 Apr 2027 (estimated)
  4. Study completion1 Oct 2027 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Crossover
Model description
We will conduct a randomised controlled trial in patients with persistent symptoms 6-18 months after NSCLC surgery, i.e., after completion of any municipal rehabilitation offer shortly after surgery. Moreover, we will conduct an exploratory study in a sub-group of participants with additional advanced assessments of the physiological adaptations to singing. Participants will be randomised 2:1 in blocks of five to either Group 1, receiving 10 weeks' online singing or Group 2, receiving 10 weeks' usual care followed by - to enhance willingness to participate - 10 weeks' online singing.
Masking
Triple blind
Who is masked
Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
100 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT07460999
Sponsor's protocol ID
SJ-1027
Acronym
Sing-a-Lung 2
Status last verified
Mar 2026
First submitted
20 Jan 2026
Last updated
2 Apr 2026
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No: Anonymised datasets will be shared upon reasonable request.

Publications

  • Bohannon RW, Crouch R. Minimal clinically important difference for change in 6-minute walk test distance of adults with pathology: a systematic review. J Eval Clin Pract. 2017 Apr;23(2):377-381. doi: 10.1111/jep.12629. Epub 2016 Sep 4.

    PubMed 27592691
  • Granger CL, Holland AE, Gordon IR, Denehy L. Minimal important difference of the 6-minute walk distance in lung cancer. Chron Respir Dis. 2015 May;12(2):146-54. doi: 10.1177/1479972315575715. Epub 2015 Mar 6.

    PubMed 25749346
  • Holland AE, Nici L. The return of the minimum clinically important difference for 6-minute-walk distance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013 Feb 15;187(4):335-6. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201212-2191ED. No abstract available.

    PubMed 23418323
  • Han B, Chen Z, Ruan B, Chen Y, Lv Y, Li C, Yu L. Effects of Inspiratory Muscle Training in People with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Life (Basel). 2024 Nov 12;14(11):1470. doi: 10.3390/life14111470.

    PubMed 39598268
  • Del Corral T, Fabero-Garrido R, Plaza-Manzano G, Fernandez-de-Las-Penas C, Navarro-Santana MJ, Lopez-de-Uralde-Villanueva I. Minimal Clinically Important Differences in Inspiratory Muscle Function Variables after a Respiratory Muscle Training Programme in Individuals with Long-Term Post-COVID-19 Symptoms. J Clin Med. 2023 Apr 5;12(7):2720. doi: 10.3390/jcm12072720.

    PubMed 37048804
  • Gosselink R, De Vos J, van den Heuvel SP, Segers J, Decramer M, Kwakkel G. Impact of inspiratory muscle training in patients with COPD: what is the evidence? Eur Respir J. 2011 Feb;37(2):416-25. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00031810.

    PubMed 21282809
  • Donohue JF. Minimal clinically important differences in COPD lung function. COPD. 2005 Mar;2(1):111-24. doi: 10.1081/copd-200053377.

    PubMed 17136971
  • Mujovic N, Mujovic N, Subotic D, Ercegovac M, Milovanovic A, Nikcevic L, Zugic V, Nikolic D. Influence of Pulmonary Rehabilitation on Lung Function Changes After the Lung Resection for Primary Lung Cancer in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Aging Dis. 2015 Nov 17;6(6):466-77. doi: 10.14336/AD.2015.0503. eCollection 2015 Nov.

    PubMed 26618048
  • Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983 Jun;67(6):361-70. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x.

    PubMed 6880820
  • Araújo Oliveira AL, Andrade L, Marques A. Minimal clinically important difference and predictive validity of the mMRC and mBorg in acute exacerbations of COPD. Physiotherapists. European Respiratory Society; 2017; p. PA4705. DOI: 10.1183/1393003.congress-2017.PA4705.

  • Ferrer M, Villasante C, Alonso J, Sobradillo V, Gabriel R, Vilagut G, Masa JF, Viejo JL, Jimenez-Ruiz CA, Miravitlles M. Interpretation of quality of life scores from the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire. Eur Respir J. 2002 Mar;19(3):405-13. doi: 10.1183/09031936.02.00213202.

    PubMed 11936515
  • Jones PW. St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire: MCID. COPD. 2005 Mar;2(1):75-9. doi: 10.1081/copd-200050513.

    PubMed 17136966
  • Bergman B, Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Kaasa S, Sullivan M. The EORTC QLQ-LC13: a modular supplement to the EORTC Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) for use in lung cancer clinical trials. EORTC Study Group on Quality of Life. Eur J Cancer. 1994;30A(5):635-42. doi: 10.1016/0959-8049(94)90535-5.

    PubMed 8080679
  • Borg GA. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1982;14(5):377-81.

    PubMed 7154893
  • Borg G. Perceived exertion as an indicator of somatic stress. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1970;2(2):92-8. No abstract available.

    PubMed 5523831

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Singing training (Singing for Lung Health (SLH)) in people with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease, run by Zealand University Hospital at 5 sites in Denmark.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 7 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 2 Apr 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 5 sites in Denmark. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Mette Kaasgaard, PhD (4528940238, mkaasgaard@health.sdu.dk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Change in Physical capacity (time frame: Changes pre-post 10 weeks (measured at all assessment points).). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07460999, which also lists 55 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 2 Apr 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in