Trial reportThe oncologist2021
High-Flow Oxygen and High-Flow Air for Dyspnea in Hospitalized Patients with Cancer: A Pilot Crossover Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in The oncologist, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02932332 (High-Flow Oxygen for Dyspnea in Hospitalized Cancer Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 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.
High-Flow Oxygen for Dyspnea in Hospitalized Cancer Patients
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline for Medication Management of Distressing Symptoms in Older Patients Receiving End-of-Life Palliative Care.Journal of evidence-based medicine · 2026Guideline
- High-flow nasal oxygen for the relief of persistent dyspnea in adult patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Palliative medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Systematic review of the literature on the occurrence and characteristics of dyspnea in oncology patients.Critical reviews in oncology/hematology · 2023Pooled it
- Randomized Controlled Trial of a Nurse-Led Brief Behavioral Intervention for Dyspnea in Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024Trial
- Article
- Oxygen therapy and noninvasive respiratory supports in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a narrative review.Annals of intensive care · 2024Review
- Monitoring Changes in Oxygen Muscle during Exercise with High-Flow Nasal Cannula Using Wearable NIRS Biosensors.Biosensors · 2023Article
- Use of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy for patients with terminal cancer at the end of life.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Current Management Options for Dyspnea in Cancer Patients.Current treatment options in oncology · 2023Review
- Management of Physical Symptoms in Patients with Advanced Cancer during the Last Weeks and Days of Life.Cancer research and treatment · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe effect of high-flow oxygen (HFOx) and high-flow air (HFAir) on dyspnea in nonhypoxemic patients is not known. We assessed the effect of HFOx, HFAir, low-flow oxygen (LFOx), and low-flow air (LFAir) on dyspnea. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND
methodsThis double-blind, 4×4 crossover clinical trial enrolled hospitalized patients with cancer who were dyspneic at rest and nonhypoxemic (oxygen saturation >90% on room air). Patients were randomized to 10 minutes of HFOx, HFAir, LFOx, and LFAir in different orders. The flow rate was titrated between 20-60 L/minute in the high-flow interventions and 2 L/minute in the low-flow interventions. The primary outcome was dyspnea numeric rating scale (NRS) "now" where 0 = none and 10 = worst.
resultsSeventeen patients (mean age 51 years, 58% female) completed 55 interventions in a random order. The absolute change of dyspnea NRS between 0 and 10 minutes was -1.8 (SD 1.7) for HFOx, -1.8 (2.0) for HFAir, -0.5 (0.8) for LFOx, and - 0.6 (1.2) for LFAir. In mixed model analysis, HFOx provided greater dyspnea relief than LFOx (mean difference [95% confidence interval] -0.80 [-1.45, -0.15]; p = .02) and LFAir (-1.24 [-1.90, -0.57]; p < .001). HFAir also provided significantly greater dyspnea relief than LFOx (-0.95 [-1.61, -0.30]; p = .005) and LFAir (-1.39 [-2.05, -0.73]; p < .001). HFOx was well tolerated. Seven (54%) patients who tried all interventions blindly preferred HFOx and four (31%) preferred HFAir.
conclusionWe found that HFOx and HFAir provided a rapid and clinically significant reduction of dyspnea at rest in hospitalized nonhypoxemic patients with cancer. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02932332). IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This double-blind, 4×4 crossover trial examined the effect of oxygen or air delivered at high- or low-flow rates on dyspnea in hospitalized nonhypoxemic patients with cancer. High-flow oxygen and high-flow air were significantly better at reducing dyspnea than low-flow oxygen/air, supporting a role for palliation beyond oxygenation.
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.