IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0322651.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapy on chronic cancer pain intensity of adults with cancer: A network meta-analysis protocol

Author

Listed:
  • Wenhao Su
  • Xueling Li
  • Yanru Wang

Abstract

Background: Chronic cancer pain is very common symptom in cancer patients, but this issue has not been satisfactorily resolved by the conventional three-step analgesic therapy. There are multiple non-pharmacological interventions for managing chronic cancer pain, but we haven’t reached a consensus on which non pharmacological treatment is the best and these treatments are lack of high-quality evidence. In order to identify the most effective non-pharmaceutical therapy alternatives and investigate further possible medication interventions, this study will use network meta-analysis to assess the therapeutic effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments on chronic cancer pain patients and support clinical decision-making by prioritizing therapies according to the most valuable clinical outcomes for these patients. Methods and analysis: We will carry out a systematic search of published randomized controlled trials (group, crossover, and parallel) in the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases, without language or date restrictions, in accordance with the PRISMA for Network Meta-Analyses (PRISMA-NMA) guidelines. Included studies must evaluate the effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments in patients with chronic cancer pain. Adult chronic cancer pain patients (≥ 18 years old) receiving pharmacological or non-pharmacological treatment will be our target participants. Our primary outcomes will be pain intensity, total effective rate of treatment, onset time, and quality of Life (QoL); Adverse reaction will be our secondary outcome. We’ll utilize the mean difference (MD) for continuous variables, the odds ratio (OR) for binary variables, and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for interval estimates. The Cochrane Bias Risk Tool (RoB2.0) will be used to assess the bias risk of every RCT trial included in NMA. We will use Review Manager 5.3 software to conduct heterogeneity testing and meta-analysis. The network meta-analysis will be performed by ADDIS1.16.8 software. The Confidence in Network Meta-analysis (CINeMA) framework will be used to evaluate the level of confidence in the NMA results. Besides, we will use SUCRA for ranking the network meta-analysis results, and we will also apply normalized entropy to verify the accuracy of the SUCRA ranking outcomes. Discussion: This network meta-analysis will compare the efficacy of pharmacological versus non-pharmacological treatments for pain intensity in chronic cancer pain patients. The final analysis results may be significantly heterogeneous, because the population with cancerous pain suffers from different types of cancers. Owing to the databases primary reliance on our listed databases for inclusion, potentially valuable research will be overlooked. Registration: This study has been registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42024505214)

Suggested Citation

  • Wenhao Su & Xueling Li & Yanru Wang, 2025. "Efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapy on chronic cancer pain intensity of adults with cancer: A network meta-analysis protocol," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(7), pages 1-11, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0322651
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0322651
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0322651
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0322651&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0322651?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0322651. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.