MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The effect of melatonin on appetite and other symptoms in patients with advanced cancer and cachexia: A double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

2012· article· en· W4249432793 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Egidio Del Fabbro, Rony Dev, David S.C. Hui, J. Lynn Palmer, Éduardo Bruera

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNutrition, Genetics, and Disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnorexiaCachexiaAppetiteMelatoninWeight lossPlaceboInternal medicineQuality of life (healthcare)Interim analysisCancerRandomized controlled trialObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

9062 Background: Patients with advanced cancer experience anorexia and weight loss which impairs their quality of life. Prior studies suggest melatonin, a frequently used integrative medicine may attenuate weight loss, anorexia, fatigue, and depression. These studies were limited by a lack of blinding and absence of placebo controls. The primary objective of this study was to compare melatonin to placebo for appetite in patients with cachexia. Methods: A randomized, double-blind, 28 day trial of melatonin 20mg vs. placebo in patients with advanced lung or gastrointestinal cancer, appetite scores >3 on a 0 to 10 scale (10 = worst appetite) and a history of weight loss ≥ 5% within 6 months. Patients unable to maintain oral intake, thyroid or adrenal dysfunction, or with a karnofsky <40 were excluded from the study. The assessments included weight, symptom severity by Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and quality of life by the Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy (FAACT).Differences between groups from baseline to day 28 were analyzed using one-sided two sample t tests (appetite, pain and well-being) or Wilcoxon two-sample tests for the other variables. Interim analysis at half point had a Lan-DeMets monitoring boundary with an O’Brien-Fleming stopping rule. The decision boundaries for the interim test was to accept the null hypothesis of no treatment difference (futility) if the test statistic Z < 0.39 (p ≥ 0.348). Results: After interim analysis of 48 patients, the study was closed by the Data Safety Monitoring Board for futility. There were no significant differences between groups in appetite (p=0.78), weight (p= 0.17), FAACT score (p=0.95), insomnia (p=0.62) or other symptoms measured by the ESAS from baseline to day 28.No significant toxicities were observed. Conclusions: In cachectic patients with advanced cancer, 20mg oral Melatonin at night does not improve appetite, weight or quality of life compared to placebo.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.359 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicNutrition, Genetics, and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207