MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399941023 · doi:10.1016/j.jnha.2024.100299

The potential of cannabinoids in managing cancer-related anorexia in older adults: a systematic review of the literature

2024· review· en· W4399941023 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chiara Ceolin, Marina De Rui, Adele Ravelli, Mario Virgilio Papa, Maria Devita, Giuseppe Sergi, Alessandra Coin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe journal of nutrition health & aging · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnorexiaCancerPsychologyMedicineSystematic reviewPsychotherapistMEDLINEInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Anorexia of aging (AoA) is a prevalent geriatric syndrome characterized by a multifactorial decline in appetite and reduced food intake associated with the aging process. This systematic review aims to investigate the use and outcomes of cannabinoids in addressing AoA, with the goal of providing a comprehensive understanding and discussing their potential integration into daily clinical practice. METHODS: A thorough search of databases (Embase Ovid, Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) identified 6100 studies. After eliminating duplicates and screening titles and abstracts, 25 studies underwent full appraisal. Two reviewers assessed inclusion suitability, and study methodologies were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for observational studies and the modified Jadad Scoring Scale for randomized controlled trials. Ultimately, six studies published between 2002 and 2019, involving 869 participants, were included in the review. RESULTS: Out of the 6 fin. l papers selected, 5 were randomized trials, and 1 was a prospective study. Megestrol acetate (800 mg/d) proved to be more effective than dronabinol 2.5 mg twice a day in increasing appetite. Nabilone (at a dosage of 0.5 mg per day) did not show superiority over placebo in alleviating symptoms such as pain, nausea, loss of appetite, and weight. However, with a double dosage followed by 1.0 mg/6 weeks, after eight weeks of treatment, patients recorded a significant increase in calorie intake and carbohydrate consumption compared to the placebo group, with some patients also experiencing substantial weight gain. Regarding delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), a weight increase of ≥10% was observed in 17.6% of patients with doses of 5 mg or 10 mg capsules daily, without significant side effects. Additionally, patients treated with THC 2.5 mg reported improved chemosensory perception and increased appetite before meals compared to placebo. No significant side effects were reported in older adults taking cannabinoids. CONCLUSIONS: Cannabinoids offer promise in enhancing the quality of life for older individuals with active neoplastic disease. However, to establish comprehensive guidelines, further research with larger sample sizes is essential. Only through this approach can we fully grasp the potential and application of cannabinoids in addressing the nutritional concerns associated with neoplastic diseases.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe journal of nutrition health & agingSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207