ReviewBJA open2022
Opioids and cancer survival: are we looking in the wrong place?
Review in BJA open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of using dexmedetomidine during surgery on the postoperative survival of cancer patients: a meta-analysis and systematic review of real-world studies.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Targeting the kappa opioid receptor for analgesia and antitumour effects.British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Exploring the possible mechanism of low-dose naloxone exposure improving the immune microenvironment of gastric cancer tumors.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Review
- In vitro sepsis up-regulates Nociceptin/Orphanin FQ receptor expression and function on human T- but not B-cells.British journal of pharmacology · 2023Article
- Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a controversial narrative in the anaesthetic literature suggesting that anaesthetic technique (including opioids) may be detrimental to survival after tumour resection. The initial observations were retrospective. Several prospective studies are ongoing; one in breast cancer has reported no adverse outcome. The evidence for an effect of opioids stems from three pieces of information: (1) opioids depress the immune system, (2) opioids potentially promote angiogenesis, and (3) opioids potentially support tumour growth. Although the evidence for (2)/(3) is unclear, combinations of these effects are beneficial to tumours and potentially promote metastatic reseeding. Accepted wisdom suggests that opioid effects are driven by opioid receptor activation but the presence of opioid receptors on immune cells for example is unlikely. Immune cells, vascular endothelium and a range of tumour cells express Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) receptors (for Gram-negative bacterial wall components), and there is growing evidence for opioids interacting with this alternative receptor; and for some there is paradoxical naloxone sensitivity. Is the focus on opioid receptors and cancer the wrong target? TLR4 receptor activation produces immune activation, stimulates angiogenesis, and supports tumour survival. We know that some opioids are more immune suppressive than others (there is no such comparative information for angiogenesis and tumour survival); this may correlate with TLR4 activation. If there are clusters of opioids that have more opioid than TLR4 profiles and
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.