Investigating the Complexity of Multidimensional Symptom Experiences in Patients With Cancer: Systematic Review of the Network Analysis Approach
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Advances in therapies have significantly improved the outcomes of patients with cancer. However, multidimensional symptoms negatively impact patients' quality of life. Traditional symptom analysis methods fail to capture the dynamic and interactive nature of these symptoms, limiting progress in supportive care. Network analysis (NA) is a promising method to evaluate complex medical situations. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review to explore NA's contribution to understanding the complexity of symptom experiences in patients with cancer. METHODS: The research question was as follows: "In patients with cancer (population), what is the contribution of NA (intervention) to understanding the complexity of multidimensional symptom experiences (outcome)?" The keywords "network analysis" AND "symptoms" AND "cancer survivors" OR "cancer patients" were searched in MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, and Scopus between 2010 and 2024. Citations were extracted using Covidence software. Two reviewers independently screened the articles and resolved inclusion disagreements through consensus. Data were synthetized, and results have been narratively described. Bias analysis was performed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies tool. RESULTS: Among 764 articles initially identified, 22 were included. Studies evaluated mixed solid tumors (n=10), digestive tract cancers (n=4), breast cancer (n=3), head and neck cancer (n=2), gliomas (n=2), and mixed solid and hematological cancers (n=1). Twelve studies used general symptom assessment tools, whereas 10 focused on neuropsychological symptoms. Moreover, 1 study evaluated symptoms at diagnosis, 1 evaluated them during curative radiotherapy, 4 evaluated them during the perioperative period, 5 evaluated them during chemotherapy, 4 evaluated them during ongoing cancer therapies, and 7 evaluated them after acute treatments. Among these, 3 evaluated the longitudinal changes in symptom networks across chemotherapy cycles, and 1 evaluated changes during radiotherapy. Three studies investigated the associations between symptoms and biological parameters. Several NA approaches were used: network visualization (n=1), Bayesian network (n=1), pairwise Markov random field and IsingFit method (n=1), unregularized Gaussian graphical model (n=2), regularized partial correlation network (n=6), network visualization and community NA (n=1), network visualization and Walktrap algorithm (n=1), undirected network model with the Fruchterman-Reingold and edge-betweenness approaches (n=4), biased correlation and concise pattern diagram (n=1), extended Bayesian information criterion graphical LASSO method (n=3), cross-lagged panel network (n=1), and unspecified NA (n=3). Psychological symptoms, particularly anxiety, depression, and distress, were frequently identified as central and stably interconnected. Fatigue consistently emerged as a core symptom, closely linked to sleep disturbances, cognitive impairment, and emotional distress. Associations between symptoms and inflammatory biomarkers (eg, interleukin-6, C-reactive protein, and tumor necrosis factor-α) suggest a biological basis for symptom interconnectivity. CONCLUSIONS: NA consistently identified core symptoms, particularly psychological symptoms and fatigue, and associations with inflammatory biomarkers. NA may deepen the understanding of symptom interconnectivity and guide more effective interventions. However, further longitudinal homogeneous studies using standardized methodologies are needed.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».