Mohammed Al Maqbali1, Mohammed Al Sinani2, Zakariya Al Naamani3, Khalid Al Badi4, Mu'ath Ibrahim Tanash5. 1. Ministry of Health, Belfast, Antrim, Oman. Electronic address: Al_Maqbali-MA@ulster.ac.uk. 2. Reproductive and Developmental Biology Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK. 3. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Queen's University Medical Biology Centre, Belfast, Northern Ireland. 4. Al Khawarizmi International College, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. 5. Department of Adult Health Nursing, Faculty of Nursing, The Hashemite University, Zarqa, Jordan.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Fatigue is a particularly common and troubling symptom that has a negative impact on quality of life throughout all phases of treatment and stages of the illness among patients with cancer. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this meta-analysis is to examine the present status of fatigue prevalence in patients with cancer. METHODS: The following databases were searched: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, from inception up to February 2020. Prevalence rates were pooled with meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was tested using I-squared (I2) statistics. RESULTS: A total of 129 studies (N = 71,568) published between 1993 and 2020 met the inclusion criteria. The overall prevalence of fatigue was 49% (34,947 of 71,656 participants, 95% CI = 45-53) with significant heterogeneity between studies (P < 0.000; τ2 = 0.0000; I2 = 98.88%). Subgroup analyses show that the prevalence of fatigue related to type of cancer ranged from 26.2% in patients with gynecological cancer to 56.3% in studies that included mixed types of cancer. In advanced cancer stage patients, the highest prevalence of fatigue (60.6%) was reported. Fatigue prevalence rates were 62% during treatment and 51% during mixed treatment status. The prevalence of fatigue decreased from 64% in studies published from 1996 to 2000 to 43% in studies published from 2016 to 2020. Metaregression identified female gender as a significant moderator for higher prevalence of fatigue, whereas mean age is not associated with fatigue. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis highlights the importance of developing optimal monitoring strategies to reduce fatigue and improve the quality of life of patients with cancer.
CONTEXT: Fatigue is a particularly common and troubling symptom that has a negative impact on quality of life throughout all phases of treatment and stages of the illness among patients with cancer. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this meta-analysis is to examine the present status of fatigue prevalence in patients with cancer. METHODS: The following databases were searched: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, from inception up to February 2020. Prevalence rates were pooled with meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was tested using I-squared (I2) statistics. RESULTS: A total of 129 studies (N = 71,568) published between 1993 and 2020 met the inclusion criteria. The overall prevalence of fatigue was 49% (34,947 of 71,656 participants, 95% CI = 45-53) with significant heterogeneity between studies (P < 0.000; τ2 = 0.0000; I2 = 98.88%). Subgroup analyses show that the prevalence of fatigue related to type of cancer ranged from 26.2% in patients with gynecological cancer to 56.3% in studies that included mixed types of cancer. In advanced cancer stage patients, the highest prevalence of fatigue (60.6%) was reported. Fatigue prevalence rates were 62% during treatment and 51% during mixed treatment status. The prevalence of fatigue decreased from 64% in studies published from 1996 to 2000 to 43% in studies published from 2016 to 2020. Metaregression identified female gender as a significant moderator for higher prevalence of fatigue, whereas mean age is not associated with fatigue. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis highlights the importance of developing optimal monitoring strategies to reduce fatigue and improve the quality of life of patients with cancer.
Authors: Lisa Morse; Kord M Kober; Carol Viele; Bruce A Cooper; Steven M Paul; Yvette P Conley; Marilyn Hammer; Jon D Levine; Christine Miaskowski Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-07-04 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Karin Dalhammar; Jimmie Kristensson; Dan Falkenback; Birgit H Rasmussen; Marlene Malmström Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2022-04-21 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Amber S Kleckner; Eva Culakova; Ian R Kleckner; Elizabeth K Belcher; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Elizabeth A Parker; Gilbert D A Padula; Mary Ontko; Michelle C Janelsins; Karen M Mustian; Luke J Peppone Journal: Nutrients Date: 2021-12-31 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Famke Huizinga; Nico-Derk Lodewijk Westerink; Annette J Berendsen; Annemiek M E Walenkamp; Mathieu H G DE Greef; Juliët K Oude Nijeweeme; Geertruida H DE Bock; Marjolein Y Berger; Daan Brandenbarg Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Amber S Kleckner; Brian J Altman; Jennifer E Reschke; Ian R Kleckner; Eva Culakova; Richard F Dunne; Karen M Mustian; Luke J Peppone Journal: J Integr Oncol Date: 2022-05-30
Authors: Amber S Kleckner; Jennifer E Reschke; Ian R Kleckner; Allison Magnuson; Andrea M Amitrano; Eva Culakova; Michelle Shayne; Colleen S Netherby-Winslow; Susan Czap; Michelle C Janelsins; Karen M Mustian; Luke J Peppone Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-08-30 Impact factor: 6.575