ReviewCurrent pain and headache reports2012
Spinal cord stimulation in the treatment of cancer-related pain: "back to the origins".
Review in Current pain and headache reports, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spinal cord stimulation for cancer-related pain in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Adult cancer pain.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2013Guideline
- Mechanisms and clinical progress of spinal cord stimulation in refractory chronic pain: an overview.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Augmented Package of Palliative Care for Women With Cervical Cancer: Responding to Refractory Suffering.JCO global oncology · 2021Article
- Interventional Therapies for Pain in Cancer Patients: a Narrative Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2021Review
- Current Perspectives on Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Cancer Pain.Journal of pain research · 2020Review
- Spinal cord stimulation for treatment of the pain associated with hereditary multiple osteochondromas.Journal of pain research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used in the treatment of chronic pain for more than 40 years. The most common indication for SCS in the USA is failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). Interestingly, the first two spinal cord stimulators ever implanted were in patients suffering from bronchogenic carcinoma and pelvic cancer, respectively. While cancer accounts for millions of deaths each year in the USA, pain is often the first sign of malignancy. An increasing number of people suffer from cancer-related pain each year and many receive suboptimal relief. Given the demonstrated value of spinal cord stimulation in the treatment of neuropathic pain, spinal cord stimulation should be considered "earlier" as an adjunct to the treatment of cancer-related pain. In addition, with the improving survival rates associated with advances in cancer treatment, spinal cord stimulation may help reduce the risk of development of chronic neuropathic pain in survivors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.