At first glance, the results of the CYCLE trial seem to say that there is nothing "special" about high-cadence cycling (i.e. it is not about the bike or the pedaling, it is about the aerobic exercise!). Or maybe the results are saying that there is a fundamental difference between the use of a powered bicycle and the use of a tandem bicycle?

Meanwhile, research on (dynamic) high-cadence cycling continues at KSU (Angela Ridgel et al.).

"Individuals (N=17) completed three sessions of high cadence cycling, on a custom motorized stationary cycle, consisting of a 5-minute warm-up at 50 revolutions per minute (rpm), 30 minutes of high cadence cycling between 75-85 rpm, and a 5-minute cool down."

The Effects Of High-Cadence Cycling On Emotional Recognition In Individuals With Parkinson’s Disease:
The Effects Of High-Cadence Cycling On Emotional Recognition In Individuals With Parkinson’S Disease: 48 Board #249 May 3 11

I've also seen Ridgel et al. use the term "dynamic cycling at a high cadence" to refer to their version of "forced exercise". [1]

[1] The Efficacy of Dynamic Cycling in an Individual with ALS: A Pilot Study:
The Efficacy of Dynamic Cycling in an Individual with ALS: A Pilot Study