ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Can non-pharmacological strategies in cancer patients support perceived appetite? A scoping review.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis review aims to identify and synthesize existing literature on non-pharmacological interventions in cancer patients in which perceived appetite was assessed as a specific outcome, either alone or as part of broader symptom or quality-of-life measures.
methodsSystematic searches were performed using Embase, PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases. Eligible studies included quantitative research involving adult cancer patients with poor appetite. All records were screened independently by two reviewers.
resultsA total of 3021 records were screened, and 29 studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies were grouped into four categories: mindfulness and relaxation, psychological or psychosocial, education and self-care, and multicomponent/comprehensive supportive-care programs. Interventions were heterogeneous in type, intensity, and delivery. Across categories, structured, repeated, and actively guided interventions were more consistently associated with improvements in perceived appetite, whereas brief or passive interventions showed limited effects. Interventions that incorporated personalization and required active patient engagement demonstrated greater effectiveness, suggesting the importance of sustained and individualized support. To support interpretation of these heterogeneous findings, results were synthesized using a conceptual framework linking intervention characteristics to psychological, sensory, physiological, and behavioral mechanisms influencing appetite perception. Within this framework, non-pharmacological appetite support appears to operate indirectly through pathways such as emotional regulation, sensory engagement, stress reduction, and active coping, rather than through appetite-specific mechanisms alone.
conclusionStructured, actively guided, and repeated non-pharmacological interventions show potential to improve perceived appetite in cancer patients, whereas brief or passive interventions appear less effective. Findings suggest that appetite support operates primarily through indirect psychological, sensory, and behavioral pathways, as captured in a conceptual framework. Further research should develop and evaluate well-defined, mechanism-informed interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42154240What 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.