Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32880472›Full record

SynthesisIntegrative cancer therapies

A Systematic Review of CheeZheng Pain Relieving Plaster for Musculoskeletal Pain: Implications for Oncology Research and Practice.

Connie Chen, Susan Q Li, Ting Bao, Lily Zhang, Christina Seluzicki, Jun J Mao

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Integrative cancer therapies. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Tibetan herbal pain-relieving plaster for low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Biomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. GenusLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  6. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Connie ChenMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5384-4707
Susan Q LiMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Ting BaoMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Lily ZhangMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Christina SeluzickiMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Jun J MaoMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMusculoskeletal pain is a common and debilitating condition for cancer patients. Existing therapies for these pain conditions have substantial limitations. To identify an integrative approach to pain management, we conducted a systematic review to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a Tibetan herbal-based topical agent, CheeZheng Pain Relieving Plaster (PRP), for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) pain.

methodsWe extracted citations from PubMed and Chinese databases (CNKI, WanFang Data, and CQVIP). We included randomized clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness and safety of CheeZheng PRP compared to conventional OA pain treatments.

resultsTwenty-two randomized clinical trials (n = 2556 participants) compared CheeZheng PRP against nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (11), glucosamine (2), intraarticular corticosteroid (2), hyaluronic acid injections (6), and acetaminophen (1). Ten studies found a statistically greater effectiveness (assessed by ≥30% reduction in symptom severity) of CheeZheng PRP in improving OA pain (measured by the Visual Analogue Scale), stiffness, and function compared to control. Ten studies reported that 4.8% of participants experienced application site skin irritation that resolved after discontinuing the plaster. Randomization was not sufficiently described in most studies, and no placebo-controlled trials were identified.

conclusionsThere is promising evidence for the safety and clinical effectiveness of CheeZheng PRP to treat OA; however, lack of placebo control and unclear descriptions of randomization increase the potential risk for bias. Future randomized, placebo-controlled trials are needed to establish the safety and efficacy of CheeZheng PRP for pain management in oncology settings.

Indexed as

Musculoskeletal PainHumansPain ManagementPain Measurementcancer pain managementchronic painherbal patch analgesicpain managementtopical pain patch

Identifiers

PMID32880472
PMCPMC7485161
OpenAlexW3083276967

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.