SynthesisPalliative medicine2026
High-flow nasal oxygen for the relief of persistent dyspnea in adult patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Palliative medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDyspnea is a frequent and distressing symptom in people with cancer. High-flow nasal oxygen has been shown to relieve dyspnea and could offer several advantages over conventional oxygen delivery devices.
aimTo assess the effectiveness of high-flow nasal oxygen compared with other medical oxygen or air delivery devices on dyspnea in people with cancer.
designThis study was designed as a systematic review and meta-analysis and was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42021265395). DATA SOURCES: EMBASE, MEDLINE and Web of Science electronic databases were searched from inception to February 23, 2025. Randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of high-flow nasal oxygen in adults with cancer were screened, and data were independently extracted by three authors. The primary outcome was the mean change in dyspnea scores.
resultsSeven trials (374 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Six trials (272 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Most trials were at a high risk of bias or had some concerns. The meta-analysis showed that high-flow nasal oxygen significantly improved dyspnea compared to other medical oxygen or air delivery devices (SMD: -0.60; 95% CI: -1.02 to -0.17;
conclusionHigh-flow nasal oxygen could be an additional therapeutic option for alleviating dyspnea in hospitalized people with advanced cancer.
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.