Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28007753›Full record

ArticleAnnals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology2016

Perspectives of health care professionals on cancer cachexia: results from three global surveys.

M Muscaritoli, F Rossi Fanelli, A Molfino

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Factors associated with multimodal care practices for cancer cachexia among registered dietitians.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. What do patients and oncologists think about the evaluation and management of cancer-related anorexia-cachexia? The Quasar_SEOM study.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2023
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Health care professionals' experiences of dealing with cancer cachexia.International journal of clinical oncology · 2023
    Article
  18. Perspectives of registered dietitians and factors associated with their personal accomplishment in the management of cancer cachexia.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

M MuscaritoliDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy maurizio.muscaritoli@uniroma1.it.
F Rossi FanelliDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
A MolfinoDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCachexia has a high prevalence in cancer patients and negatively impacts prognosis, quality of life (QOL), and tolerance/response to treatments. This study reports the results of three surveys designed to gain insights into cancer cachexia (CC) awareness, understanding, and treatment practices among health care professionals (HCPs).

methodsSurveys were conducted globally among HCPs involved in CC management. Topics evaluated included definitions and synonyms of CC, diagnosis and treatment practices, and goals and desired improvements of CC treatment.

resultsIn total, 742 HCPs from 14 different countries participated in the surveys. The majority (97%) of participants were medical oncologists or hematologists. CC was most frequently defined as weight loss (86%) and loss of appetite (46%). The terms loss of weight and decreased appetite (51% and 34%, respectively) were often provided as synonyms of CC. Almost half (46%) of the participants reported diagnosing CC and beginning treatment if a patient experienced a weight loss of 10%. However, 48% of the participants would wait until weight loss was ≥15% to diagnose CC and start treatment. HCPs also reported that 61%-77% of cancer patients do not receive any prescription medication for CC before Stage IV of disease is reached. Ability to promote weight gain was rated as the most important factor for selecting CC treatment. Key goals of treatment included ensuring that patients can cope with the cancer and treatment and have a QOL benefit. HCPs expressed desire for treatments with a more CC-specific mode of action and therapies that enhance QOL.

conclusionsThese surveys underscore the need for increased awareness among HCPs of CC and its management.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelPrognosisCachexiaFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasmsQuality of LifeSurveys and Questionnairescancer cachexiaglobal surveyhealth care professionalloss of appetiteweight loss

Identifiers

PMID28007753
PMCPMC5178142

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.