Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18182991›Full record

SynthesisBritish journal of cancer2008

Oxygen for relief of dyspnoea in mildly- or non-hypoxaemic patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

H E Uronis, D C Currow, D C McCrory, G P Samsa, A P Abernethy

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in British journal of cancer, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 158 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. [Oxygen in the acute care of adults : Short version of the German S3 guideline].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2022
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. The effect of resistance inspiratory muscle training in the management of breathlessness in patients with thoracic malignancies: a randomised controlled trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Can guidelines rein in oxygen use? A retrospective cross-sectional study using routinely collected data.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2023
    Article
  13. Current Management Options for Dyspnea in Cancer Patients.Current treatment options in oncology · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

H E UronisDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
D C Currow
D C McCrory
G P Samsa
A P Abernethy
Duke Medical Center · USDuke University · USFlinders University · AU

Funding

HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH FELLOWSHIPT32HS000079 · AHRQ · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI EDELMAN, DAVID · 1998 to 2013
$1.9M
AHRQ HHS T32 HS000079
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of palliative oxygen for relief of dyspnoea in cancer patients. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for randomised controlled trials, comparing oxygen and medical air in cancer patients not qualifying for home oxygen therapy. Abstracts were reviewed and studies were selected using Cochrane methodology. The included studies provided oxygen at rest or during a 6-min walk. The primary outcome was dyspnoea. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) were used to combine scores. Five studies were identified; one was excluded from meta-analysis due to data presentation. Individual patient data were obtained from the authors of the three of the four remaining studies (one each from England, Australia, and the United States). A total of 134 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Oxygen failed to improve dyspnoea in mildly- or non-hypoxaemic cancer patients (SMD=-0.09, 95% confidence interval -0.22 to 0.04; P=0.16). Results were stable to a sensitivity analysis, excluding studies requiring the use of imputed quantities. In this small meta-analysis, oxygen did not provide symptomatic benefit for cancer patients with refractory dyspnoea, who would not normally qualify for home oxygen therapy. Further study of the use of oxygen in this population is warranted given its widespread use.

Indexed as

AgedAlgorithmsDyspneaFemaleHumansHypoxiaMaleNeoplasmsOxygenOxygen Inhalation TherapyPalliative CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeOxygen

Identifiers

PMID18182991
PMCPMC2361446
OpenAlexW2070591275

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.