Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29400010›Full record

SynthesisJournal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle2018

Systematic review and meta-analysis of cannabinoids in palliative medicine.

Martin Mücke, Megan Weier, Christopher Carter, Jan Copeland, Louisa Degenhardt, Henning Cuhls, Lukas Radbruch, Winfried Häuser, Rupert Conrad

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
11.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 153 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Systematic review and meta-analysis of cannabinoids in palliative medicine.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2018
    Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Evidence synthesis of medical cannabis research: current challenges and opportunities.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Psychological Survivorship in Head and Neck Cancer.Seminars in plastic surgery · 2023
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Martin MückeDepartment of Palliative Medicine, University Hospital of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Megan WeierNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Christopher CarterDepartment of Palliative Medicine, University Hospital of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Jan CopelandNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Louisa DegenhardtNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Henning CuhlsDepartment of Palliative Medicine, University Hospital of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Lukas RadbruchDepartment of Palliative Medicine, University Hospital of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Winfried HäuserDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Rupert ConradDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
University Hospital Bonn · DEUNSW Sydney · AUMalteser-Krankenhaus · DENational Centre for Clinical Research on Emerging Drugs · AUTechnical University of Munich · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We provide a systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of cannabinoids in palliative medicine. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and http://clinicaltrials.gov, and a selection of cancer journals were searched up until 15th of March 2017. Of the 108 screened studies, nine studies with a total of 1561 participants were included. Overall, the nine studies were at moderate risk of bias. The quality of evidence comparing cannabinoids with placebo was rated according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation as low or very low because of indirectness, imprecision, and potential reporting bias. In cancer patients, there were no significant differences between cannabinoids and placebo for improving caloric intake (standardized mean differences [SMD]: 0.2 95% confidence interval [CI]: [-0.66, 1.06] P = 0.65), appetite (SMD: 0.81 95% CI: [-1.14, 2.75]; P = 0.42), nausea/vomiting (SMD: 0.21 [-0.10, 0.52] P = 0.19), >30% decrease in pain (risk differences [RD]: 0.07 95% CI: [-0.01, 0.16]; P = 0.07), or sleep problems (SMD: -0.09 95% CI: [-0.62, 0.43] P = 0.72). In human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients, cannabinoids were superior to placebo for weight gain (SMD: 0.57 [0.22; 0.92]; P = 0.001) and appetite (SMD: 0.57 [0.11; 1.03]; P = 0.02) but not for nausea/vomiting (SMD: 0.20 [-0.15, 0.54]; P = 0.26). Regarding side effects in cancer patients, there were no differences between cannabinoids and placebo in symptoms of dizziness (RD: 0.03 [-0.02; 0.08]; P = 0.23) or poor mental health (RD: -0.01 [-0.04; 0.03]; P = 0.69), whereas in HIV patients, there was a significant increase in mental health symptoms (RD: 0.05 [0.00; 0.11]; P = 0.05). Tolerability (measured by the number of withdrawals because of adverse events) did not differ significantly in cancer (RD: 1.15 [0.80; 1.66]; P = 0.46) and HIV patients (RD: 1.87 [0.60; 5.84]; P = 0.28). Safety did not differ in cancer (RD: 1.12 [0.86; 1.46]; P = 0.39) or HIV patients (4.51 [0.54; 37.45]; P = 0.32) although there was large uncertainty about the latter reflected in the width of the CI. In one moderate quality study of 469 cancer patients with cancer-associated anorexia, megestrol was superior to cannabinoids in improving appetite, producing >10% weight gain and tolerability. In another study comparing megestrol to dronabinol in HIV patients, megestrol treatment led to higher weight gain without any differences in tolerability and safety. We found no convincing, unbiased, high quality evidence suggesting that cannabinoids are of value for anorexia or cachexia in cancer or HIV patients.

Indexed as

CannabinoidsHumansPalliative MedicineCannabinoidscancercannabinoidsHIVmarijuanapalliationsystematic reviewweight gain

Identifiers

PMID29400010
PMCPMC5879974
OpenAlexW2791111785

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.