SynthesisBreast cancer research and treatment2025
Adverse effects of scalp cooling for the reduction of chemotherapy-induced alopecia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Corrective and Restorative Dermatology in Cancer Survivors: An Urgent Unmet Need!American journal of clinical dermatology · 2026Review
- Mechanism-Based Strategies for Prevention of Taxane-Induced Hair Follicle Damage in Cancer Chemotherapy.Cancers · 2026Review
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeChemotherapy-induced alopecia (CIA) affects approximately 65% of patients receiving chemotherapy and has a negative impact on quality of life (QoL). Scalp cooling (SC) is the only FDA-cleared intervention for CIA. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated SC adverse events (AEs), reasons for discontinuation, and scalp metastasis incidence.
methodsMeta-analyses using random-effects models estimated pooled prevalences of SC AEs, SC discontinuation, and reasons for discontinuation. A generalized linear mixed model was used to estimate the incidence of scalp metastasis.
resultsSixty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. The most common AEs were generalized chills (42%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 26-58%), cap heaviness (35%, 95% CI 18-52%), and headache (30%, 95% CI 21-39%). The SC discontinuation rate was 18% (95% CI 13-23%). The most common reasons for discontinuation were progressive alopecia (15%, 95% CI 10-20%) and reasons unrelated to SC (9%, 95% CI 5-13%). The most frequent AEs leading to SC discontinuation were headache (4%, 95% CI 2-6%), cold intolerance (4%, 95% CI 3-5%), and general discomfort (4%, 95% CI 2-7%). Secondary analysis of scalp metastases yielded an incidence of 0.15% (95% CI 0.05-0.47%). Analysis of FDA Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database medical device reports revealed that user error contributed to cold thermal injuries. Prevalence estimates were limited by significant heterogeneity between studies, reflecting variations in study methodology and real-world SC practices.
conclusionSC is generally well tolerated with minimal safety concerns. Clinical comfort strategies like supportive medications and improved patient education could enhance SC tolerability and support its implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41269388What 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.