Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34881518›Full record

SynthesisJournal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle2022

Cannabinoid interventions for improving cachexia outcomes in cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Lucile Simon, Christine Baldwin, Anastasia Z Kalea, Adrian Slee

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Cannabis and Cannabinoids in Adults With Cancer: ASCO Guideline.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
    Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Evidence synthesis of medical cannabis research: current challenges and opportunities.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2025
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lucile SimonDivision of Medicine, University College London, London, UK.
Christine BaldwinDepartment of Nutritional Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Anastasia Z KaleaDivision of Medicine, University College London, London, UK.
Adrian SleeDivision of Medicine, University College London, London, UK.
University College London · GBKing's College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer-associated cachexia (CAC) is a wasting syndrome characterized by involuntary weight loss and anorexia. Clear definition and diagnostic criteria for CAC are lacking, which makes it difficult to estimate its prevalence, to interpret research and to compare studies. There is no standard treatment to manage CAC, but previous studies support the use of cannabinoids for cachexia in other chronic diseases including HIV and multiple sclerosis. However, only a few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one meta-analysis of this intervention in cancer populations are available. Non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) are often excluded from reviews due to variable methodology and potential for biases. This review aimed to consider NRSIs alongside RCTs to provide a complete summary of the available evidence that clinical decision makers could use in future investigations. Literature searches were conducted using three databases for relevant RCTs or NRSIs according to Cochrane methodology. Abstract and full texts of retrieved manuscripts were selected and retrieved by two investigators based on the PRISMA-A guidelines, and risk of bias and quality of evidence assessments were performed. Outcome data on weight, appetite, quality of life, performance status, adverse effects, and mortality were combined by narrative synthesis and meta-analysis where possible. Ten studies were included, four of which were RCTs and six NRSIs matching the eligibility criteria. Very low-quality evidence from meta-analysis suggested no significant benefits of cannabinoids for appetite compared with control (standardized mean difference: -0.02; 95% confidence interval: -0.51, 0.46; P = 0.93). Patient-reported observations from NRSIs suggested improvements in appetite. Another meta-analysis of moderate quality evidence showed that cannabinoids were significantly less efficient than active or inactive control on quality of life (standardized mean difference: -0.25; 95% confidence interval: -0.43, -0.07; P = 0.007). The effectiveness of cannabinoids alone to improve outcomes of CAC remains unclear. Low-quality evidence from both RCTs and NRSIs shows no significant benefits of cannabinoids for weight gain, appetite stimulation, and better quality of life, three important outcomes of cachexia. Higher quality research integrating cannabinoids into multi-modal therapies may offer better opportunities for developing CAC-specific treatments. This review also highlights that findings from non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) can provide evidence of the effects of an intervention and advocate for the feasibility of larger RCTs.

Indexed as

CannabinoidsNeoplasmsBiasCachexiaHumansQuality of LifeCannabinoidsAppetiteCachexiaCancerCannabinoidsQuality of lifeWeight

Identifiers

PMID34881518
PMCPMC8818598
OpenAlexW4200619254

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.