Efficacy and Safety of Different Acupuncture Treatments for Cancer-Related Pain: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.8 3区医学 Q2 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE Integrative Cancer Therapies Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/15347354251314500

Tianle Xie, Can Liu, Yudi Wu, Xiuxiu Li, Qianyun Yang, Jing Tan

{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Different Acupuncture Treatments for Cancer-Related Pain: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Tianle Xie, Can Liu, Yudi Wu, Xiuxiu Li, Qianyun Yang, Jing Tan","doi":"10.1177/15347354251314500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Cancer pain is a prevalent and persistent issue, and while there have been some observations of the possible benefits of acupuncture in managing cancer pain, there is still debate regarding its safety and effectiveness. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of different acupuncture modalities in the treatment of cancer pain through a network meta-analysis.Methods: Between the time each database was created and June 3, 2024, eight databases were queried: PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and China Biomedicine. Randomized controlled trials investigating the use of various acupuncture and moxibustion techniques in the treatment of cancer pain were identified. Publication bias and quality of randomized controlled trials were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the Jadad scale, and network meta-analyses were performed using Stata 15 and R 4.3.2.Results: We incorporated 111 studies encompassing 9549 individuals diagnosed with cancer, examining 29 distinct therapies. Network meta-analysis showed that, compared to Usual Medicine, Acupuncture + Usual Medicine + Traditional Chinese medicine (MD = -1.83, 95% CI: -2.86 to -0.80) could reduce NRS scores, Acupuncture + Traditional Chinese medicine (OR = 30.86, 95% CI: 3.75-254.20) could improve cancer pain relief, Moxibustion + Usual Medicine (MD = 2.12, 95% CI: 0.43-3.80) could effectively improve KPS score, Acupuncture + Application of Chinese medicine (OR = 0.16, 95% CI: 0.04-0.66) is associated with a lower incidence of constipation, Electro-Acupuncture + Usual Medicine (OR = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.03-0.45) shows a lower incidence of nausea and vomiting, Acupuncture + Moxibustion + Usual Medicine (OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.09-0.90) is associated with a lower incidence of dizziness.Conclusion: Acupuncture + Traditional Chinese medicine is the best intervention for different acupuncture methods in the treatment of cancer pain, and Moxibustion + Usual Medicine is the best intervention to improve the quality of life of patients.","PeriodicalId":13734,"journal":{"name":"Integrative Cancer Therapies","volume":"24 ","pages":"15347354251314500"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11773549/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrative Cancer Therapies","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15347354251314500","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Cancer pain is a prevalent and persistent issue, and while there have been some observations of the possible benefits of acupuncture in managing cancer pain, there is still debate regarding its safety and effectiveness. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of different acupuncture modalities in the treatment of cancer pain through a network meta-analysis.

Methods: Between the time each database was created and June 3, 2024, eight databases were queried: PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and China Biomedicine. Randomized controlled trials investigating the use of various acupuncture and moxibustion techniques in the treatment of cancer pain were identified. Publication bias and quality of randomized controlled trials were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the Jadad scale, and network meta-analyses were performed using Stata 15 and R 4.3.2.

Results: We incorporated 111 studies encompassing 9549 individuals diagnosed with cancer, examining 29 distinct therapies. Network meta-analysis showed that, compared to Usual Medicine, Acupuncture + Usual Medicine + Traditional Chinese medicine (MD = -1.83, 95% CI: -2.86 to -0.80) could reduce NRS scores, Acupuncture + Traditional Chinese medicine (OR = 30.86, 95% CI: 3.75-254.20) could improve cancer pain relief, Moxibustion + Usual Medicine (MD = 2.12, 95% CI: 0.43-3.80) could effectively improve KPS score, Acupuncture + Application of Chinese medicine (OR = 0.16, 95% CI: 0.04-0.66) is associated with a lower incidence of constipation, Electro-Acupuncture + Usual Medicine (OR = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.03-0.45) shows a lower incidence of nausea and vomiting, Acupuncture + Moxibustion + Usual Medicine (OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.09-0.90) is associated with a lower incidence of dizziness.

Conclusion: Acupuncture + Traditional Chinese medicine is the best intervention for different acupuncture methods in the treatment of cancer pain, and Moxibustion + Usual Medicine is the best intervention to improve the quality of life of patients.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

不同针灸治疗癌症相关疼痛的疗效和安全性：系统综述和网络荟萃分析。

背景：癌症疼痛是一个普遍和持续存在的问题，虽然有一些观察表明针灸在治疗癌症疼痛方面可能有好处，但关于其安全性和有效性仍存在争议。本研究旨在通过网络荟萃分析比较不同针刺方式治疗癌性疼痛的疗效和安全性。方法：从每个数据库创建时间到2024年6月3日，查询PubMed、Cochrane、Embase、Web of Science、CNKI、万方、VIP、中国生物医药等8个数据库。随机对照试验调查使用各种针灸技术在治疗癌症疼痛被确定。采用Cochrane风险偏倚工具和Jadad量表评估随机对照试验的发表偏倚和质量，采用Stata 15和r4.3.2进行网络荟萃分析。结果：我们纳入了111项研究，涵盖9549名确诊癌症患者，检查了29种不同的治疗方法。网络meta分析显示，与常规用药相比，针刺+常规用药+中药（MD = -1.83, 95% CI: -2.86 ~ -0.80）可降低NRS评分，针刺+常规用药（OR = 30.86, 95% CI: 3.75 ~ 254.20）可改善癌性疼痛缓解，艾灸+常规用药（MD = 2.12, 95% CI: 0.43 ~ 3.80）可有效改善KPS评分，针刺+应用中药(OR = 0.16, 95% CI：0.04-0.66)与便秘发生率较低有关，电针+常规药物（OR = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.03-0.45）显示恶心和呕吐发生率较低，针灸+艾灸+常规药物（OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.09-0.90）与头晕发生率较低有关。结论：针刺+中药是不同针刺方式治疗癌性疼痛的最佳干预方式，艾灸+常用药是改善患者生存质量的最佳干预方式。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Integrative Cancer Therapies 医学-全科医学与补充医学

CiteScore

4.80

自引率

3.40%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： ICT is the first journal to spearhead and focus on a new and growing movement in cancer treatment. The journal emphasizes scientific understanding of alternative medicine and traditional medicine therapies, and their responsible integration with conventional health care. Integrative care includes therapeutic interventions in diet, lifestyle, exercise, stress care, and nutritional supplements, as well as experimental vaccines, chrono-chemotherapy, and other advanced treatments. Contributors are leading oncologists, researchers, nurses, and health-care professionals.