SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Cancer Pain”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

407 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

The Effect of Pain Catastrophizing on Acupuncture Treatment for Chronic Pain in Cancer Survivors.

CONTEXT: Pain catastrophizing (PC) predicts worse pain outcomes in cancer survivors. However, little is known whether PC influences pain outcomes of nonpharmacological treatments such as acupuncture. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the impact of PC on acupuncture efficacy for chronic pain in cancer survivors. METHODS: This secondary analysis of PEACE trial used two-sample t-test and Pearson's chi-squared test to analyze the pain outcomes of cancer survivors who received electroacupuncture (EA) or battlefield acupuncture (BFA). PC was measured using Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). The Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) was used to measure pain severity and interference at the primary endpoint (week 12). RESULTS: Among 266 participants, 41 (15.41%) had a high baseline PC. Among those receiving EA, high PC patients had greater reductions in pain severity (-3.9 vs. -2.1, P = 0.006) and pain interference (-3.8 vs. -2.6, P = 0.04) than low PC. PC was not associated with pain outcomes in BFA group (P > 0.05 for both severity and interference). Among patients with high PC, a greater proportion were responders in the EA group than those in BFA group (83.3% vs. 43.5%, P = 0.009). Among low PC patients, there was no significant difference in the proportion of responders between the EA and BFA groups (66.1% vs. 64.5%, P = 0.8). CONCLUSION: We found that cancer survivors with high baseline PC had greater pain reductions with EA than BFA and compared to low PC patients. These findings suggest that EA may serve as a targeted treatment option for vulnerable patients with high PC and further support precision pain management.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Continuous Intravenous Lidocaine for Refractory Cancer Pain in Palliative Care: A Multicenter Feasibility Study.

ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility and tolerability of continuous low-dose intravenous lidocaine infusion in patients with opioid-refractory cancer pain receiving palliative care, and to explore its potential impact on pain outcomes in real-world clinical conditions.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled feasibility study in palliative care units to evaluate continuous intravenous lidocaine infusion in patients with opioid-refractory cancer pain. Patients were randomized to receive lidocaine (5 mg/kg/day, increased to 8 mg/kg/day if pain reduction was <30% after 24 h) or placebo for 48 h. Pain intensity was assessed using the Numeric Pain Intensity Scale, with a clinically meaningful response defined as a ≥30% reduction from baseline at 40 min. Secondary outcomes included pain evolution over time, neuropathic pain, symptom burden, and tolerability.ResultsThirty-five patients were included in the final analysis (18 lidocaine, 17 placebo). No significant difference was observed between lidocaine and placebo for the primary endpoint or for secondary pain outcomes. Reductions in pain intensity were observed in both groups. In the lidocaine group, 61% of patients required dose escalation to 8 mg/kg/day. Continuous intravenous lidocaine infusion was generally well tolerated, with mostly mild adverse events and no unexpected toxicity.ConclusionIn this multicenter feasibility study, continuous low-dose intravenous lidocaine did not demonstrate a clinically meaningful analgesic benefit over placebo. As the planned sample size was not reached, the study was underpowered. These findings highlight the challenges of randomized trials in palliative care and may inform future feasibility-oriented designs.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparative effectiveness and safety of pharmacological interventions for sleep outcomes in chronic non-cancer pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Sleep disturbances are highly prevalent among individuals with chronic non-cancer pain and are associated with worse pain severity and poorer prognosis. The comparative trade-offs between the effectiveness and safety of available pharmacotherapies for sleep outcomes in this population remain poorly defined. Ninety-eight RCTs involving 28,920 participants (mean age 53.2 years, 71.2% female) were included. Moderate-certainty evidence demonstrated that melatonin significantly improved sleep quality compared with placebo (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.60, 95%CI: -0.98, -0.22). Ten agents (e.g., amitriptyline, oxycodone, gabapentin, pregabalin, duloxetine) also showed statistically significant improvements in subjective sleep quality (SMD = -0.24 to -1.07), but most effects were supported by low-certainty evidence and were accompanied by an increased risk of adverse events (odds ratio [OR] = 1.90 to 37.00). Conversely, melatonin was not associated with an increased risk (OR = 0.88, 95%CI: 0.19, 3.94). Our findings indicate that melatonin shows promise as a safe, adjunctive option for improving sleep quality in this population, but larger, condition-specific trials are warranted to confirm these effects. Other pharmacological agents are limited by lower-certainty and unfavorable safety profiles. These results should be interpreted cautiously given limited direct comparisons, heterogeneous chronic pain populations, the high proportion of trials at high risk of bias, and the predominance of subjective sleep outcomes.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a virtually administered pain coping skills training intervention in women with breast cancer in underserved areas.

OBJECTIVES: Women with cancer who live in medically underserved areas could benefit from behavioral pain interventions, but access is limited. A randomized trial reported that a 4-session virtual program incorporating pain coping skills training (mPCST) was effective in improving pain outcomes compared to an attention-control condition. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of mPCST vs. control. METHODS: Data on medical resource use, therapist time, and participants' attendance at intervention sessions and time associated with travel and using a mobile app were collected. The 5-level EuroQol 5-Dimension (EQ-5D-5L), a preference-weighted measure of health-related quality of life (HRQOL), was administered at baseline, after the intervention period, and 3 and 6 months later. Medicare payments were used to value medical resource use and therapist time to deliver mPCST. Patient time was valued using the average US wage. RESULTS: Medical resource utilization was similar for both groups, but hospitalizations trended higher in the mPCST group. EQ-5D-5L preference weights were higher by an average of 0.066 (p = 0.04) with mPCST across the follow-up period, representing an incremental gain of 0.04 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (95% CI: 0.00-0.08). When including the base-case cost of mPCST of \$500 vs. \$0 for the control group, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was \$12,725 per QALY (95% CI: 5,566-69,343). Including the value of patient time added \$303 to mPCST costs resulting in an ICER of \$20,438 per QALY (95% CI: 9,051-111,403). SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: mPCST is a cost-effective program that improves HRQOL for women with cancer living in medically underserved areas.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effects of erector spinae plane block on postoperative pain in patients undergoing implant-based breast reconstruction for breast cancer: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Implant-based breast reconstruction after mastectomy causes acute pain. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a single-shot T5 erector spinae plane block (ESPB) reduces postoperative pain. DESIGN: Single-center, RCT with allocation concealment; blinded assessors and statisticians. SETTING: Tertiary cancer center in China. PATIENTS: 100 adults scheduled for radical mastectomy with implant reconstruction were randomized (1:1); follow-up complete. INTERVENTION: Before induction, ESPB was given under ultrasound guidance at T5 with 30 mL of 0.375% ropivacaine plus dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg; controls received no block. Standardized general anesthesia and postoperative PCA for both groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Resting NRS at 6 h (MCID=1). Secondary outcomes were opioid consumption, quality of recovery, and PONV. RESULTS: ESPB did not significantly reduce resting pain at 6 h at the median (τ =0.50; adjusted difference -0.9; p = 0.08). At the upper tail, pain intensity was lower (τ = 0.75; -1.8; p <0.01). Repeated measures provided additional time-point information, improving estimation precision and test sensitivity. ESPB get lower pain scores at 6, 12, and 24 hours (all p <0.01). But, the 95% CI includes the MCID, the clinical benefit remains uncertain. Opioid use decreased at 24 h (-13.5 mg; p <0.01) and 48 h (-6.6 mg; p <0.01). Quality of recovery improved at 24 h (difference 5 points; p <0.01), but not later. No differences were observed in intraoperative hemodynamics or PONV. CONCLUSIONS: Single-shot T5 ESPB with perineural dexmedetomidine may reduce postoperative pain and opioid requirements and improve early recovery. Further large trials are warranted. Clinical relevance remains to be confirmed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06143020.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Mindfulness and Sex Education for Sexual Dysfunction in Breast Cancer Survivors: Mediators and Moderators of Treatment Outcome.

Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) and supportive-expressive sex education therapy (STEP) are effective group treatments for sexual dysfunction after breast cancer (BrCa). We explored mediators and moderators of outcomes following the 8-week groups. BrCa survivors (n = 116, mean age = 49.9 ± 9.5) were randomized to group and completed measures before, immediately after, and 6 months after treatment. Mediators assessed were changes in depression, chronic pain acceptance, pain catastrophizing, and trait mindfulness. Potential moderators included age, treatment expectations, baseline mental health, cancer treatment duration, use of chemotherapy, and adjuvant endocrine therapy. Longitudinal mediation and moderation were assessed using linear mixed models. Increases in pain acceptance mediated improvements in sexual desire and reductions in both sexual distress and vaginal pain. Decreases in pain catastrophizing mediated improvements in sexual distress. Higher expectations for treatment led to greater reductions in sexual distress. Those with low baseline anxiety showed greater improvements in desire and distress. Low baseline depression predicted greater improvements in desire, but only in the STEP arm. Older STEP participants improved significantly more than younger STEP participants. Cancer-related treatment variables, and the impact of adjuvant endocrine therapy, had differential effects on outcomes based on the treatment arm of the study. In conclusion, treatments aimed at improving pain acceptance and pain catastrophizing are likely to promote improvements in sexual health among BrCa survivors, and factoring in patients' expectations about treatment improvements, depression and anxiety, age, duration of cancer treatment, chemotherapy, and adjuvant hormonal therapy may help to guide treatment recommendations for sexual dysfunction.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety Profile of the Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drug Celecoxib in the Short-Term Management of Acute Non-cancer Pain: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To summarise the literature regarding the safety of short-term use of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) celecoxib. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Participants comprised individuals of all ages with acute non-cancer pain. Interventions included celecoxib at 200-400 mg/day for up to 10 days. The comparators were placebo, other NSAIDs (including cyclooxygenase-2 [COX-2] inhibitors and non-selective NSAIDS [nsNSAIDS]), or opioids. DATA SOURCES: Five databases were searched from inception to April 2025: Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus. Additionally, a registry was searched: ClinicalTrials.gov. DATA SYNTHESIS: Meta-analyses using Mantel-Haenszel and random-effects model were used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for severe cardiovascular, respiratory, and gastrointestinal adverse events and secondary outcomes. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomised trials (RoB-2) was used to assess bias risk. The Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was conducted to assess the certainty of evidence of each reported outcome. RESULTS: Title/abstract and full text screening comprised 3976 and 273 studies, respectively. Fifty studies were included with 10,693 participants. The RRs for adverse events were no different between celecoxib and placebo for severe events (3 studies) (RR 0.44 [95% CI 0.10-2.03]), cardiovascular (3 studies) (RR 0.84 [95% CI 0.24-2.92]), respiratory (4 studies) (RR 1.23 [95% CI 0.29-5.26]), and gastrointestinal events (33 studies) (RR 0.96 [95% CI 0.64-1.43]). There was no difference between celecoxib and NSAIDS for gastrointestinal adverse events, RR 0.89 (95% CI 0.68-1.17). Celecoxib had a lower risk compared to opioids for gastrointestinal events, RR 0.34 (95% CI 0.14-0.86), and showed a lower risk of nausea compared with placebo, RR 0.75 (95% CI 0.60-0.93), and nsNSAIDS, RR 0.80 (95% CI 0.64-0.99). Most studies had some risk of bias concerns, and the overall certainty of evidence for most outcomes was very low. Celecoxib appears to be safe for acute non-cancer pain when compared to placebo, NSAIDS, and opioids. It had a lower risk compared to opioids for gastrointestinal adverse events in general, nausea and vomiting, as well as a lower risk for nausea adverse events when compared to placebo and nsNSAIDS. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO-CRD42025642152.

Journal Article↗

PubMed2026

Secretory Phospholipase A2 in Patients With Sickle Cell Disease Hospitalized for Vaso-Occlusive Pain Episodes.

BACKGROUND: Secretory phospholipase A2 (sPLA2) is an inflammatory mediator linked to acute chest syndrome (ACS) in sickle cell disease (SCD), a serious complication that can develop during an acute vaso-occlusive pain episode (VOE). Plasma sPLA2 levels have been proposed as a potential biomarker for predicting ACS onset. OBJECTIVE: To assess serial plasma sPLA2 levels in 105 pediatric patients hospitalized for SCD-VOE and determine the effects of arginine therapy compared to placebo. PROCEDURES: This is a pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics and randomized controlled trial of intravenous arginine therapy. Statistical methods included t-tests, chi-square, and correlation analyses. RESULTS: Mean age was 12.7 ± 3.7 years, 48% were male, 67% had Hb-SS, and 70% were prescribed hydroxyurea. Using a previously established SCD-specific cutoff of 48 ng/mL, presenting sPLA2 levels were elevated in 33% of patients (mean sPLA2 level 85.7 ± 32.9 ng/mL). SPLA2 elevation in the emergency department was more common in patients with ACS compared to those without ACS (64% vs. 30%; p = 0.02; negative predictive value of 94%). Peak sPLA2 levels were significantly higher in febrile (n = 34) versus afebrile patients (n = 71;101.0 ± 45.3 vs. 48.7 ± 35.4 ng/mL; p < 0.0001). Among subjects with elevated baseline sPLA2, arginine therapy resulted in a significant reduction in sPLA2 levels by discharge compared to placebo (-27.8 ± 38.1 ng/mL; p = 0.002; n = 23 vs. -15.0 ± 41.2 ng/mL; p = 0.23; n = 12). CONCLUSIONS: SPLA2 is an underutilized biomarker of ACS given accumulating evidence of its role. In particular, low levels may identify patients at low risk for ACS. Arginine therapy may modulate inflammation in patients with SCD during VOE and/or ACS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02447874; NCT02536170.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

A Sentiment-Based Comparison of AI- and Physician-Generated Empathic Statements in Palliative Care.

CONTEXT: Empathic communication promotes trust in patient-provider relationships. As healthcare integrates artificial intelligence (AI) into patient communication, we have yet to understand how these models' communication compares to that of physicians. OBJECTIVES: Our primary objectives were to examine patient preferences for AI-generated vs. palliative care physician-generated empathic statements addressing fear and anxiety around cancer treatment, and to analyze associations between linguistic features and patient preferences. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of the PALL-AI trial, a randomized controlled survey comparing cancer patients' preferences of AI- to physician-generated empathic statements. Physicians and AI were provided the same prompt with a maximum sentence length. Patient preferences for each statement were measured in blinded surveys. We analyzed sentiment of the statements using the Valence Aware Dictionary and Sentiment Reasoner (VADER) and the National Research Council Canada (NRC) Emotion Lexicon. We evaluated associations between sentiment scores and patient preferences using Spearman's correlation coefficients. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients completed blinded surveys, preferring the AI-generated statement 72.4% of the time. VADER sentiment analysis showed all three AI statements displayed positive sentiment, while all three physician statements displayed negative sentiment. Controlling for statement length, AI statements used twice as many positive words as human statements. However, they contained a similar number of negative words. Of the eight NRC emotions, "trust" and "joy" demonstrated the strongest correlations with patient preference. CONCLUSION: Patients preferred AI-generated statements around cancer care over those from palliative care physicians when standardized for prompt and statement length. Analysis shows AI-generated statements contain more positive language which may be the factor driving patient preference toward AI.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Outcomes at rapid diagnostic centres and the association between non-specific symptoms and cancer: A systematic review and meta-analyses of up to 21,392 patients.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer remains a leading cause of mortality and poses a significant public health challenge. Several non-specific symptoms (NSSs) often indicate non-serious disease but can also accompany malignancy even in the absence of organ-specific signs. Therefore, the aim of the study was to comprehensively delineate the association between the most common NSSs (weight loss, fatigue, pain and nausea/appetite loss) and cancer or non-cancer diagnoses. METHODS: Database searches of PubMed and Embase were conducted applying search criteria to identify studies that investigated common NSSs in cancer patients diagnosed through rapid diagnostic centres (RDCs). The quality of the included studies was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). For each symptom, pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals were derived using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies were considered to be of high methodological quality. The most frequent disease locations for cancer entities included hematologic, lung and lower gastrointestinal. Together with miscellaneous, rheumatic, and musculoskeletal conditions, these were the most common for non-cancer diagnoses. Nausea/appetite loss showed a statistically significant association with cancer (RR=1.20, 95%-CI 1.07-1.35). Pain showed a non-significant association (RR=1.07, 95%-CI 0.75-1.53) with substantial between-study heterogeneity, and weight loss showed a non-significant inverse trend (RR=0.92, 95%-CI 0.84-1.02). Fatigue showed no association with cancer (RR=1.00, 95%-CI 0.85-1.18). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: NSSs may be valuable for cancer risk assessment, but the associations remain modest. The complexity of patients' clinical presentations suggests that additional factors likely influence the cancer risk. Future research should examine symptom combinations and, where data allow, perform subgroup analyses.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Journey Mapping of the Patient Experience from Diagnosis to End of Life in Lung Cancer: A Qualitative Meta-Synthesis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to systematically synthesize the lived experiences and journey narratives of lung cancer patients across disease stages, and identify key tasks and pain points during the disease course through patient journey mapping, providing evidence for comprehensive disease management throughout the patient journey. METHODS: Ten databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, and SinoMed, were systematically searched, with a search period from database inception to August 15, 2025. The JBI Critical Appraisal Tool for qualitative studies was used to evaluate the quality of studies, and the results were integrated using a meta-aggregative approach. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included. Based on the patient journey mapping, the lung cancer patient journey comprises four potential stages: evaluation and diagnosis, initial treatment, maintenance therapy, and end-of-life. A total of 30 themes emerged within three dimensions: tasks, emotions, and pain points. Each dimension of each stage consists of 2-3 themes. CONCLUSION: The journey of lung cancer patients is protracted and complex, characterized by stage-specific needs and challenges. Future management strategies should be tailored to these distinct phases, providing precision supportive care to optimize treatment outcomes and enhance patients' quality of life. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: This Patient Journey Map integrates routine clinical pathways with patients' lived experiences across each stage, revealing stage-specific challenges and providing targets for tailored nursing interventions. The framework promotes multidisciplinary, digitally enabled supportive care and indicates the importance of including patients' social circles to enhance patient-centered outcomes.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effects of different resistance exercise programs on upper limb functional recovery in postoperative breast cancer patients.

PURPOSE: To investigate the effects of grip strength exercise combined with upper limb resistance exercise on upper limb functional rehabilitation in patients after breast cancer surgery. METHODS: A total of 111 patients who underwent either modified radical mastectomy with ALND or breast-conserving surgery with ALND were randomly assigned to a control group, an upper limb resistance exercise group, and a combined grip and upper limb resistance exercise group. Grip strength was measured at baseline, 16 weeks after intervention, and at 3- and 6-month follow-ups, while shoulder function was assessed using the Constant-Murley Scale (CMS). RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in grip strength or CMS scores among the groups before intervention (P > 0.05). At the post-intervention, 3-month, and 6-month follow-ups, compared with the control group, both resistance training protocols significantly improved patients' joint range of motion, pain, muscle strength, total CMS score, and grip strength (P < 0.05). Compared with the upper limb resistance exercise group, the combined grip and upper limb resistance exercise group demonstrated superior grip strength at the 6-month follow-up (P < 0.05), as well as more significant improvements in joint range of motion, pain, muscle strength, and total CMS scores (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: A 16-week resistance exercise program effectively improves upper limb function in post-surgical breast cancer patients, with the combined grip and upper limb resistance exercise program yielding superior outcomes.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Patient-reported outcomes with tarlatamab in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer after platinum-based chemotherapy: results from the phase 3 DeLLphi-304 trial.

BACKGROUND: Extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) is associated with a high symptom burden and impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This prespecified analysis from the phase 3 DeLLphi-304 trial evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for tarlatamab versus standard-of-care (SoC) chemotherapy following first-line platinum-based therapy. METHODS: DeLLphi-304 is a multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 3 study in adults with ES-SCLC. PROs were assessed using validated instruments, including the EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-LC13, FACT-G GP5, BPI-SF, and the EQ-5D-5L visual analogue scale. Change from baseline, response rates, and time to deterioration in these PROs were analyzed. RESULTS: PRO data from all 509 patients enrolled were evaluated. Compliance with QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 assessments remained above 69% through 19 weeks. A higher proportion of patients receiving tarlatamab achieved symptom or functional improvement at 19 weeks compared with SoC in chest pain (19% vs 10%), cough (35% vs 26%), dyspnea (22% vs 7%), physical functioning (13% vs 8%), and global health status (23% vs 15%), respectively. Tarlatamab also delayed deterioration in symptoms, physical functioning, and pain at worst relative to SoC. FACT-G GP5 results indicated that patients receiving tarlatamab were less bothered by treatment side effects over time. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to its previously reported antitumor activity, tarlatamab demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements in symptoms and HRQoL compared with SoC. These findings support a favorable benefit-risk profile of tarlatamab in patients previously treated for ES-SCLC.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety and efficacy of Meridian sinew tuina (MST) for post-surgical upper limb lymphedema: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Complex Decongestive Therapy (CDT) is the non-operative standard for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL), but many patients experience persistent subcutaneous stiffness, pain, and restricted mobility. This study systematically reviews the safety and clinical efficacy of Meridian Sinew Tuina (MST) protocols for BCRL. METHODS: Global and regional databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP) were searched from inception to January 15, 2026, with alerts monitored through April 30, 2026. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating MST (deep tissue mobilisation along the six-hand meridian sinew [Jingjin] lines via plucking, kneading, and pressing) were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data, evaluated risk of bias using Cochrane RoB 2, and assessed evidence certainty via GRADE using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Fifteen RCTs were included. For the primary anthropometric outcome, MST significantly reduced upper limb circumference compared to controls (SMD = 1.59; 95% CI: 1.44 to 1.74; Z = 20.81; p < 0.0001; I2=0.0%; N = 924; GRADE: Moderate certainty). The Clinical Response Efficacy Rate (≥ 30% swelling reduction and symptom relief) favoured MST (RR = 1.69; 95% CI: 1.54 to 1.87; Z = 10.62; p < 0.0001; I2=0.0%; N = 1,114; GRADE: Moderate certainty). Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed sample size sufficiency. For secondary outcomes (N = 924; GRADE: Low to Very Low certainty due to performance bias and clinical heterogeneity), MST showed favourable 3-month improvements in DASH functional scores (SMD = -1.81; 95% CI: -2.11 to -1.51; I2=45.1%), pain intensity (SMD = -2.44; 95% CI: -2.93 to -1.95; I2=50.4%), and quality of life (SMD = 1.04; 95% CI: 0.79 to 1.29; I2=0.0%). No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: MST protocols are associated with favourable short- and mid-term reductions in upper limb swelling. However, confidence is tempered by unblinded performance bias and control group variations. MST cannot be unconditionally recommended for standalone implementation but represents a promising, optional supportive adjunctive intervention within oncological rehabilitation.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

PCa Detection in PI-RADS 4 and 5 Lesions: Comparison of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT-Guided Robot-Assisted Biopsy Versus mpMRI Cognitive-Fusion TRUS-Guided Prostate Biopsy.

Lesions with a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score of 4 or greater on multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) indicate a high likelihood of prostate cancer (PCa), and guidelines recommend a targeted biopsy. We aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of robotic arm-assisted [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT-guided prostate biopsy (PGPB) with mpMRI-directed cognitive-fusion transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (MCFB) in biopsy-naïve men with clinical findings suggestive of PCa. Methods: This prospective, single-center, randomized clinical trial (NCT05137561) enrolled biopsy-naïve men age 50-90 y with elevated levels of prostate-specific antigen (≥4 ng/mL) and abnormal digital rectal examination findings. All participants underwent mpMRI, and those with a PI-RADS score of 4 or greater were randomized into 2 arms. In arm 1, participants underwent PGPB for a [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-avid lesion, and participants in arm 2 underwent MCFB. Participants in arm 1 with PET-negative findings subsequently underwent MCFB, and participants with negative biopsy results underwent PET and PGPB. The primary outcome was the detection of PCa. Secondary outcomes included complication rates and participant-reported pain. Result: Of the 267 participants enrolled, 81.3% (217) had lesions with a PI-RADS score of 4 or greater and were randomized to either PGPB (n = 112) or MCFB (n = 105). PCa was detected in 97.1% of participants (101/104) in arm 1 and 81.0% (85/105) in arm 2 (P < 0.05). PGPB showed higher diagnostic accuracy for PI-RADS 5 lesions (100% vs. 95.1%, P = 0.09). Major complications were observed in arm 2 only (n = 5). Arm 1 had significantly fewer complications (10.8% vs. 51.4%, P < 0.01), a lower median visual analog scale score for pain (3 vs. 5), and shorter procedure times. The core positivity rate was higher in arm 1 (60% ± 20%), despite obtaining fewer cores. Conclusion: [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PGPB demonstrated higher diagnostic performance, fewer complications, and better tolerability compared with MCFB. This approach enables integrated diagnosis and staging, offering a promising alternative for efficient, safe, and accurate evaluation of prostate cancer.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Early and late CTCAE and patient-reported outcomes following lung cancer radiotherapy: A sex-stratified descriptive analysis from the REQUITE cohort.

BACKGROUND: Long-term prospective data on lung cancer patients treated with radiotherapy are limited, restricting understanding of outcomes and sex-specific characteristics. The multicentre REQUITE study provides standardized follow-up data from an international cohort. METHODS: We analysed longitudinal data from 530 lung cancer patients treated with radical radiotherapy (sequential or concurrent chemoradiotherapy, or stereotactic body radiation therapy [SBRT]) between 2014 and 2017 at 16 centres in Europe and the USA. Healthcare professionals prospectively recorded 21 pulmonary, oesophageal, neurological, cardiac, and skin adverse events using CTCAE v4.0. Patient-reported outcomes assessed symptoms, quality-of-life, fatigue, and physical activity. Adverse event incidence was stratified by sex, radiotherapy technique, chemotherapy administration, smoking status, and other clinical factors. RESULTS: At 12 months, 309 patients were evaluable, with 151 having follow-up beyond one year. Pulmonary adverse events were most frequent (40% grade ≥ 2), mainly dyspnoea and cough. Women had higher rates of oesophagitis, and more frequently reported dysphagia, and chest wall pain, while men experienced a higher frequency of cardiac adverse events. Exploratory subgroup analyses identified significant sex-related differences in grade ≥ 3 pulmonary adverse events following SBRT and in overall grade ≥ 2 oesophageal adverse events among patients with clinical stage I-II and those aged >70 years. Patient-reported outcomes showed persistent fatigue and reduced physical activity, particularly in females. Symptom prevalence and severity varied by sex, age, treatment modality, smoking status, and clinical stage. CONCLUSION: The REQUITE-Lung cohort provides prospectively collected real-world data on radiotherapy-related adverse events in lung cancer patients. This study describes patterns of adverse events and patient-reported outcomes according to sex, age, and treatment characteristics. These findings are hypothesis-generating and may support future validation in independent and pooled datasets.

Patient-reported outcomes↗

PubMed2026

Health-Related quality of life (HRQoL) and health state utility values (HSUV) in patients with head and neck Cancer: A systematic review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Head and neck cancer (HNC) and its treatment can substantially impair speech, swallowing, eating, appearance, and social functioning, resulting in persistent reductions in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Although the EuroQol 5-Dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D) is widely used to assess generic HRQoL and derive health state utility values (HSUVs), EQ-5D-based evidence in HNC has not been comprehensively synthesized. This study aimed to summarize EQ-5D-based HRQoL and HSUVs in HNC, estimate pooled utility and EQ-VAS scores, explore subgroup differences, and identify predictors of poorer HRQoL. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261307907). PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched from inception to February 10, 2026. Studies reporting baseline EQ-5D utility values and/or EQ-VAS scores in patients with HNC were included. Random-effects meta-analyses using the DerSimonian-Laird (DL) estimator with the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) adjustment were performed to pool mean scores. Between-study variance (τ2) and 95 % prediction intervals (PI) were calculated to capture parameter dispersion. Subgroup analyses were conducted across clinical and methodological vectors. RESULTS: Twenty studies involving 7,403 patients were included. The pooled mean EQ-5D utility score was 0.79 (95 % CI: 0.75-0.83; τ2 = 0.0011; 95 % PI: 0.72-0.86). The pooled mean EQ-VAS score was 69.36 (95 % CI: 65.71-73.01; τ2 = 38.4586; 95 % PI: 55.11-83.61). Extreme heterogeneity was observed (I2 = 96.4 % and 97.1 %, respectively). Utility values were significantly higher in studies utilizing the EQ-5D-5 L than the EQ-5D-3 L version (0.82 vs. 0.76). By tumor subsite, nasopharyngeal cancer showed the highest utility value (0.85, exploratory), whereas oral cancer demonstrated the lowest (0.73). Adjusted multivariable models revealed that advanced stage, high treatment intensity, severe pharyngolaryngeal pain, dysphagia, malnutrition, and older age were robust predictors of poorer HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HNC experience substantial and persistent HRQoL impairment, with meaningful variations driven by tumor subsites and instrument versions. In light of the extreme heterogeneity, these pooled findings establish a macro-level, broad reference estimate rather than a fixed target. These parameters directly inform localized survivorship care planning, health technology evaluations, and cost-utility decision-making modeling in head and neck oncology.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Improved quality of life and prolonged survival with add-on homeopathic treatment in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, three-arm, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Alongside conventional anticancer treatment, add-on homeopathy might help to alleviate adverse effects of conventional therapy. AIM: The aim of this study was to replicate previous studies on the effect of adjunctive homeopathy on quality of life (QoL) and survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. METHOD: In this prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, three-arm multicenter phase III study with quadruple-checked data analysis, we investigated the potential effects of an add-on homeopathic treatment compared to placebo in patients with stage IV NSCLC in terms of QoL. Ninety-eight received either individualized homeopathic medicinal products (HMPs; n = 51) or placebo (n = 47) in a double-blinded fashion. Fifty-two control patients without homeopathic treatment were only observed in terms of their survival rate. The ingredients of the various HMPs were mainly prepared of plant, mineral, or animal origin. The data entry and statistical analysis were subject to an exceptional quadruple-checked data analysis process. The analysis presented in this article was inspired by our earlier report of this trial published in The Oncologist in 2020, which was retracted by that journal in November 2025 after two corrections; a majority of the co-authors disagreed with this decision. The present article is based on the same trial dataset but was deliberately designed to highlight the unique research methodology: design and preparation by a lead statistician, data entry, data clearing and independent statistical evaluation were performed in four mutually independent steps, reporting follows the CONSORT statement, and the interpretation of the findings has been reframed conservatively. RESULTS: Global health status (QoL) was higher in the homeopathy group than in the placebo group after 9 weeks and after 18 weeks (p < 0.001). With the exception of cognitive functioning at 9 weeks and of pain, diarrhea and financial difficulties at 9 weeks, all functional and symptom scales of the EORTC QLQ-C30 favored the homeopathy group (p < 0.001 for the multivariate comparisons), with between-group differences exceeding the threshold of 10 points that is generally regarded as clinically meaningful. Median survival time over the 730-day observation period was 435 days in the homeopathy group, 257 days in the placebo group (p = 0.010), and 228 days in the non-randomized control group (p < 0.001); the corresponding 2-year survival rates were 45.1%, 23.4%, and 13.5% (homeopathy vs. placebo p = 0.020; homeopathy vs. control p < 0.001). The difference between the placebo group and the non-randomized control group was not statistically significant (p = 0.154). CONCLUSION: In this trial, add-on homeopathy was associated with better quality of life across most functional and symptom domains, with clinically meaningful effect sizes congruently to a previous open study. Survival time was significantly longer in the homeopathy group compared to both the placebo and control groups. Independent replication, ideally within contemporary immuno-oncological treatment regimens is required. TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01509612; January 7, 2012.

Humans↗