Cannabinoid interventions for improving cachexia outcomes in cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lucile Simon; Christine Baldwin; Anastasia Z. Kalea; Adrian Slee

doi:10.1002/jcsm.12861

Cannabinoid interventions for improving cachexia outcomes in cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lucile Simon, Christine Baldwin, Anastasia Z. Kalea, Adrian Slee^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Nutritional Sciences

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Cancer-associated cachexia (CAC) is a wasting syndrome characterized by involuntary weight loss and anorexia. Clear definition and diagnostic criteria for CAC are lacking, which makes it difficult to estimate its prevalence, to interpret research and to compare studies. There is no standard treatment to manage CAC, but previous studies support the use of cannabinoids for cachexia in other chronic diseases including HIV and multiple sclerosis. However, only a few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one meta-analysis of this intervention in cancer populations are available. Non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) are often excluded from reviews due to variable methodology and potential for biases. This review aimed to consider NRSIs alongside RCTs to provide a complete summary of the available evidence that clinical decision makers could use in future investigations. Literature searches were conducted using three databases for relevant RCTs or NRSIs according to Cochrane methodology. Abstract and full texts of retrieved manuscripts were selected and retrieved by two investigators based on the PRISMA-A guidelines, and risk of bias and quality of evidence assessments were performed. Outcome data on weight, appetite, quality of life, performance status, adverse effects, and mortality were combined by narrative synthesis and meta-analysis where possible. Ten studies were included, four of which were RCTs and six NRSIs matching the eligibility criteria. Very low-quality evidence from meta-analysis suggested no significant benefits of cannabinoids for appetite compared with control (standardized mean difference: −0.02; 95% confidence interval: −0.51, 0.46; P = 0.93). Patient-reported observations from NRSIs suggested improvements in appetite. Another meta-analysis of moderate quality evidence showed that cannabinoids were significantly less efficient than active or inactive control on quality of life (standardized mean difference: −0.25; 95% confidence interval: −0.43, −0.07; P = 0.007). The effectiveness of cannabinoids alone to improve outcomes of CAC remains unclear. Low-quality evidence from both RCTs and NRSIs shows no significant benefits of cannabinoids for weight gain, appetite stimulation, and better quality of life, three important outcomes of cachexia. Higher quality research integrating cannabinoids into multi-modal therapies may offer better opportunities for developing CAC-specific treatments. This review also highlights that findings from non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) can provide evidence of the effects of an intervention and advocate for the feasibility of larger RCTs.

Original language	English
Journal	Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle
Volume	13
Issue number	1
Early online date	8 Dec 2021
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1002/jcsm.12861
Publication status	E-pub ahead of print - 8 Dec 2021

Keywords

Appetite
Cachexia
Cancer
Cannabinoids
Quality of life
Weight

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1002/jcsm.12861

Cite this

@article{f356c550e85048c38873d06b1bcdc4a1,

title = "Cannabinoid interventions for improving cachexia outcomes in cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis",

abstract = "Cancer-associated cachexia (CAC) is a wasting syndrome characterized by involuntary weight loss and anorexia. Clear definition and diagnostic criteria for CAC are lacking, which makes it difficult to estimate its prevalence, to interpret research and to compare studies. There is no standard treatment to manage CAC, but previous studies support the use of cannabinoids for cachexia in other chronic diseases including HIV and multiple sclerosis. However, only a few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one meta-analysis of this intervention in cancer populations are available. Non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) are often excluded from reviews due to variable methodology and potential for biases. This review aimed to consider NRSIs alongside RCTs to provide a complete summary of the available evidence that clinical decision makers could use in future investigations. Literature searches were conducted using three databases for relevant RCTs or NRSIs according to Cochrane methodology. Abstract and full texts of retrieved manuscripts were selected and retrieved by two investigators based on the PRISMA-A guidelines, and risk of bias and quality of evidence assessments were performed. Outcome data on weight, appetite, quality of life, performance status, adverse effects, and mortality were combined by narrative synthesis and meta-analysis where possible. Ten studies were included, four of which were RCTs and six NRSIs matching the eligibility criteria. Very low-quality evidence from meta-analysis suggested no significant benefits of cannabinoids for appetite compared with control (standardized mean difference: −0.02; 95% confidence interval: −0.51, 0.46; P = 0.93). Patient-reported observations from NRSIs suggested improvements in appetite. Another meta-analysis of moderate quality evidence showed that cannabinoids were significantly less efficient than active or inactive control on quality of life (standardized mean difference: −0.25; 95% confidence interval: −0.43, −0.07; P = 0.007). The effectiveness of cannabinoids alone to improve outcomes of CAC remains unclear. Low-quality evidence from both RCTs and NRSIs shows no significant benefits of cannabinoids for weight gain, appetite stimulation, and better quality of life, three important outcomes of cachexia. Higher quality research integrating cannabinoids into multi-modal therapies may offer better opportunities for developing CAC-specific treatments. This review also highlights that findings from non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) can provide evidence of the effects of an intervention and advocate for the feasibility of larger RCTs.",

keywords = "Appetite, Cachexia, Cancer, Cannabinoids, Quality of life, Weight",

author = "Lucile Simon and Christine Baldwin and Kalea, {Anastasia Z.} and Adrian Slee",

note = "Funding Information: The submission charges were funded by UCL Library. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 The Authors. Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society on Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders.",

year = "2021",

month = dec,

day = "8",

doi = "10.1002/jcsm.12861",

language = "English",

volume = "13",

journal = "Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle",

issn = "2190-5991",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cannabinoid interventions for improving cachexia outcomes in cancer

T2 - a systematic review and meta-analysis

AU - Simon, Lucile

AU - Baldwin, Christine

AU - Kalea, Anastasia Z.

AU - Slee, Adrian

N1 - Funding Information: The submission charges were funded by UCL Library. Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society on Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders.

PY - 2021/12/8

Y1 - 2021/12/8

N2 - Cancer-associated cachexia (CAC) is a wasting syndrome characterized by involuntary weight loss and anorexia. Clear definition and diagnostic criteria for CAC are lacking, which makes it difficult to estimate its prevalence, to interpret research and to compare studies. There is no standard treatment to manage CAC, but previous studies support the use of cannabinoids for cachexia in other chronic diseases including HIV and multiple sclerosis. However, only a few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one meta-analysis of this intervention in cancer populations are available. Non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) are often excluded from reviews due to variable methodology and potential for biases. This review aimed to consider NRSIs alongside RCTs to provide a complete summary of the available evidence that clinical decision makers could use in future investigations. Literature searches were conducted using three databases for relevant RCTs or NRSIs according to Cochrane methodology. Abstract and full texts of retrieved manuscripts were selected and retrieved by two investigators based on the PRISMA-A guidelines, and risk of bias and quality of evidence assessments were performed. Outcome data on weight, appetite, quality of life, performance status, adverse effects, and mortality were combined by narrative synthesis and meta-analysis where possible. Ten studies were included, four of which were RCTs and six NRSIs matching the eligibility criteria. Very low-quality evidence from meta-analysis suggested no significant benefits of cannabinoids for appetite compared with control (standardized mean difference: −0.02; 95% confidence interval: −0.51, 0.46; P = 0.93). Patient-reported observations from NRSIs suggested improvements in appetite. Another meta-analysis of moderate quality evidence showed that cannabinoids were significantly less efficient than active or inactive control on quality of life (standardized mean difference: −0.25; 95% confidence interval: −0.43, −0.07; P = 0.007). The effectiveness of cannabinoids alone to improve outcomes of CAC remains unclear. Low-quality evidence from both RCTs and NRSIs shows no significant benefits of cannabinoids for weight gain, appetite stimulation, and better quality of life, three important outcomes of cachexia. Higher quality research integrating cannabinoids into multi-modal therapies may offer better opportunities for developing CAC-specific treatments. This review also highlights that findings from non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) can provide evidence of the effects of an intervention and advocate for the feasibility of larger RCTs.

AB - Cancer-associated cachexia (CAC) is a wasting syndrome characterized by involuntary weight loss and anorexia. Clear definition and diagnostic criteria for CAC are lacking, which makes it difficult to estimate its prevalence, to interpret research and to compare studies. There is no standard treatment to manage CAC, but previous studies support the use of cannabinoids for cachexia in other chronic diseases including HIV and multiple sclerosis. However, only a few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one meta-analysis of this intervention in cancer populations are available. Non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) are often excluded from reviews due to variable methodology and potential for biases. This review aimed to consider NRSIs alongside RCTs to provide a complete summary of the available evidence that clinical decision makers could use in future investigations. Literature searches were conducted using three databases for relevant RCTs or NRSIs according to Cochrane methodology. Abstract and full texts of retrieved manuscripts were selected and retrieved by two investigators based on the PRISMA-A guidelines, and risk of bias and quality of evidence assessments were performed. Outcome data on weight, appetite, quality of life, performance status, adverse effects, and mortality were combined by narrative synthesis and meta-analysis where possible. Ten studies were included, four of which were RCTs and six NRSIs matching the eligibility criteria. Very low-quality evidence from meta-analysis suggested no significant benefits of cannabinoids for appetite compared with control (standardized mean difference: −0.02; 95% confidence interval: −0.51, 0.46; P = 0.93). Patient-reported observations from NRSIs suggested improvements in appetite. Another meta-analysis of moderate quality evidence showed that cannabinoids were significantly less efficient than active or inactive control on quality of life (standardized mean difference: −0.25; 95% confidence interval: −0.43, −0.07; P = 0.007). The effectiveness of cannabinoids alone to improve outcomes of CAC remains unclear. Low-quality evidence from both RCTs and NRSIs shows no significant benefits of cannabinoids for weight gain, appetite stimulation, and better quality of life, three important outcomes of cachexia. Higher quality research integrating cannabinoids into multi-modal therapies may offer better opportunities for developing CAC-specific treatments. This review also highlights that findings from non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) can provide evidence of the effects of an intervention and advocate for the feasibility of larger RCTs.

KW - Appetite

KW - Cachexia

KW - Cancer

KW - Cannabinoids

KW - Quality of life

KW - Weight

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85120806029&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/jcsm.12861

DO - 10.1002/jcsm.12861

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85120806029

SN - 2190-5991

VL - 13

JO - Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle

JF - Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle

IS - 1

ER -

Cannabinoid interventions for improving cachexia outcomes in cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this