Dataset Information

Personalized electro-acupuncture versus auricular-acupuncture comparative effectiveness (PEACE): A protocol of a randomized controlled trial for chronic musculoskeletal pain in cancer survivors.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Chronic pain is a leading cause of disability and remains under-treated in nearly half of patients with cancer. The opioid crisis has highlighted an urgent public health need for effective nonpharmacological pain management. Electroacupuncture (EA) and Battlefield Acupuncture (BFA) represent nonpharmacological modalities used in clinical practice to manage pain; however, their effectiveness has not been rigorously evaluated in oncology settings. METHODS:We describe the design of a 3-arm, parallel, single-center, multisite randomized controlled trial that investigates EA and BFA versus usual-care wait-list control (WLC) for chronic musculoskeletal pain among 360 patients with diverse cancer types across various stages. The primary aim is to compare effects of EA and BFA versus WLC on pain, physical function, and co-morbid symptoms. The secondary aim is to examine the interaction between patient outcome expectancy and acupuncture modality (EA vs BFA) on pain reduction. The tertiary aim is to evaluate the association between genetic polymorphisms and responses to acupuncture. Patients will be randomized in a 2:2:1 ratio to EA:BFA:WLC. Acupuncture groups will receive weekly treatments over 10 weeks. WLC will receive usual care over the same evaluation period as the acupuncture groups. The primary endpoint will be the change in average pain intensity score from baseline to week 12. We will collect validated patient-reported outcomes and blood/saliva samples at multiple timepoints over 24 weeks. DISCUSSION:Our findings will advance nonpharmacological pain management in oncology and inform personalized treatment approaches that integrate individuals' expectations and genetic biomarkers to deliver "precision" acupuncture to cancer patients with chronic pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02979574.

SUBMITTER: Liou KT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7249872 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Personalized electro-acupuncture versus auricular-acupuncture comparative effectiveness (PEACE): A protocol of a randomized controlled trial for chronic musculoskeletal pain in cancer survivors.

Liou Kevin T KT Baser Ray R Romero Sally A D SAD Green Jamie J Li Q Susan QS Orlow Irene I Panageas Katherine S KS Mao Jun J JJ

Medicine 20200501 21

<h4>Introduction</h4>Chronic pain is a leading cause of disability and remains under-treated in nearly half of patients with cancer. The opioid crisis has highlighted an urgent public health need for effective nonpharmacological pain management. Electroacupuncture (EA) and Battlefield Acupuncture (BFA) represent nonpharmacological modalities used in clinical practice to manage pain; however, their effectiveness has not been rigorously evaluated in oncology settings.<h4>Methods</h4>We describe th ...[more]

PMID: 32481275

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe opioid crisis creates challenges for cancer pain management. Acupuncture confers clinical benefits for chronic nonmalignant pain, but its effectiveness in cancer survivors remains uncertain.ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of electroacupuncture or auricular acupuncture for chronic musculoskeletal pain in cancer survivors.Design, setting, and participantsThe Personalized Electroacupuncture vs Auricular Acupuncture Comparative Effectiveness (PEACE) trial is a randomized clinical trial that was conducted from March 2017 to October 2019 (follow-up completed April 2020) across an urban academic cancer center and 5 suburban sites in New York and New Jersey. Study statisticians were blinded to treatment assignments. The 360 adults included in the study had a prior cancer diagnosis but no current evidence of disease, reported musculoskeletal pain for at least 3 months, and self-reported pain intensity on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable).InterventionsPatients were randomized 2:2:1 to electroacupuncture (n = 145), auricular acupuncture (n = 143), or usual care (n = 72). Intervention groups received 10 weekly sessions of electroacupuncture or auricular acupuncture. Ten acupuncture sessions were offered to the usual care group from weeks 12 through 24.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was change in average pain severity score on the BPI from baseline to week 12. Using a gatekeeping multiple-comparison procedure, electroacupuncture and auricular acupuncture were compared with usual care using a linear mixed model. Noninferiority of auricular acupuncture to electroacupuncture was tested if both interventions were superior to usual care.ResultsAmong 360 cancer survivors (mean [SD] age, 62.1 [12.7] years; mean [SD] baseline BPI score, 5.2 [1.7] points; 251 [69.7%] women; and 88 [24.4%] non-White), 340 (94.4%) completed the primary end point. Compared with usual care, electroacupuncture reduced pain severity by 1.9 points (97.5% CI, 1.4-2.4 points; P < .001) and auricular acupuncture reduced by 1.6 points (97.5% CI, 1.0-2.1 points; P < .001) from baseline to week 12. Noninferiority of auricular acupuncture to electroacupuncture was not demonstrated. Adverse events were mild; 15 of 143 (10.5%) patients receiving auricular acupuncture and 1 of 145 (0.7%) patients receiving electroacupuncture discontinued treatments due to adverse events (P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial among cancer survivors with chronic musculoskeletal pain, electroacupuncture and auricular acupuncture produced greater pain reduction than usual care. However, auricular acupuncture did not demonstrate noninferiority to electroacupuncture, and patients receiving it had more adverse events.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02979574.

Project description:IntroductionBattlefield Acupuncture (BFA), a standardized auricular acupuncture protocol, is widely used for pain in the military but is not well-studied in oncology. This study examined cancer survivors who received BFA for pain.MethodsThis is a secondary analysis of a randomized trial that compared the effectiveness of BFA and electroacupuncture vs. usual care for chronic musculoskeletal pain in cancer survivors. This study focused on participants randomized to BFA. Participants received 10 weekly treatments. Needles were placed until one of these stop conditions were satisfied: ten needles were administered; pain severity decreased to ≤1 out of 10; patient declined further needling, or vasovagal reaction was observed. Pain severity was assessed using Brief Pain Inventory. Responders were those with ≥30% pain severity reduction. We examined pain location, BFA stop reason, and pain reduction of participants during the first session. We also examined which factors predicted responder status after the first session (week 1) or the full treatment (week 12).ResultsAmong 143 randomized to BFA, most common pain locations were lower back (30.8%) and knee/leg (18.2%). Of 138 who initiated treatment, 41 (30.0%) received ten needles; 81 (59.1%) achieved pain ≤1; 14 (10.2%) declined further needling; and 1 (0.7%) had vasovagal reaction. BFA reduced pain severity by 2.9 points (95% CI 2.6 to 3.2) after the first session (P < 0.001). After adjusting for baseline pain severity, responders at week 1 were 2.5 times more likely to be responders at week 12, compared to those who were non-responders at week 1 (AOR 2.5, 95% CI 1.02 to 6.11, P = 0.04). Among those who achieved pain ≤1, 74% were responders at week 12, a higher proportion compared to the proportion of responders among those who received ten needles (39.5%), those who declined further needling (50%), and those with vasovagal reaction (0.0%) (P = 0.001). Those with pain in proximal joints had a higher proportion of responders at week 12, compared to those with pain in distal joints (64.2% vs. 20%, P = 0.008).ConclusionSpecific factors may predict the likelihood of achieving meaningful pain reduction from BFA. Understanding these predictors could inform precision pain management and acupuncture delivery models.

Project description:BackgroundPolycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a prevalent women's health condition with reproductive, metabolic, and psychological manifestations. Weight loss can improve these symptoms and is a key goal; however, many women find this difficult to achieve. Acupuncture is a Chinese medical treatment that involves insertion of very fine metal needles into specific areas of the body and has been shown to be efficacious for weight loss in non-PCOS populations. However, few studies have been conducted in women with PCOS. A variant of acupuncture, auricular electro-acupuncture (AEA), may have beneficial effects on sympathetic tone, which is associated with insulin resistance, obesity and PCOS.MethodsThis prospective three-arm open label parallel randomised controlled trial will assess feasibility and acceptability of acupuncture and/or AEA for weight loss in women with PCOS. We will enrol 39 women from the community aged between 18 and 45 years, with physician diagnosis of PCOS according to the Rotterdam criteria: body mass index (BMI) between 25 and 40 kg/m2. Women will be randomly allocated to receive one of three treatments for 12 weeks duration: body electro-acupuncture + lifestyle interventions, AEA + lifestyle interventions, or lifestyle interventions alone. The lifestyle intervention in this study is telephone-based health coaching (between 4 and 13 phone calls, depending on individual need), provided by the Get Healthy Service. Primary outcomes of the study are feasibility and acceptability of trial methods as determined by recruitment and retention rates, adherence, acceptability, credibility, and safety. Secondary outcomes include anthropometric (body weight, BMI, waist and hip circumference), metabolic (glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity obtained from a 2-h 75 g oral glucose tolerance test with area under the curve insulin calculated using the trapezoid rule), reproductive (androgen levels, menstrual cyclicity, clinical hyperandrogenism using the Ferriman-Gallwey scoring system), autonomic (heart rate variability, blood pressure), lifestyle (physical activity levels, diet quality, weight self-efficacy), quality of life, and psychological (depression and anxiety symptoms, internal health locus of control).DiscussionThis study addresses the feasibility and acceptability of novel interventions to treat overweight/obesity in PCOS. Study findings have the potential to generate a new understanding of the role of acupuncture and auricular acupuncture in weight management.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, 8/6/18 ACTRN12618000975291.

Project description:Expression of Concern: Medical Acupuncture issues an Expression of Concern pertaining to a published article in the October 2021 issue of the journal entitled, "Self-Administration of Auricular Acupuncture in Rural Veterans with Chronic Pain: A Pilot Project," by Brian Lee James, John Welch, and Clint Williamson. (Med Acupunct 33(5):2021.349-352; doi: 10.1089/acu.2021.0007) The journal has received communications from several sources raising significant concerns regarding the claims made in this article as they pertain to the self-administration of Battlefield Acupuncture and patient self-use of acupuncture needles. Each communication states that acupuncture needles are considered FDA-approved medical equipment and are not intended for patient self-administration. An official inquiry with the authors' institution has been launched by the editors and publisher of the journal. Such an inquiry may be a protracted process but the journal will update this notice once a resolution has been reached. Objective: There has been little research on self-administration of auricular acupuncture by patients. This study was conducted to assess the safety and feasibility of self-administration of Battlefield Acupuncture (BFA) with semipermanent needles at intervals of 2 weeks over a timeperiod of 6 months. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted at the Chillicothe Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Chillicothe, OH, USA, and its satellite Community-Based Outpatient Clinics in Ohio. The participants were 12 healthy veteran volunteers (10 males and 2 females) who previously had repeated good responses to BFA administration by a provider. Outcomes of treatment-emergent adverse events and subjective perception of pain relief, compared with provider-administered BFA, were collected telephonically every 2 weeks for 6 months. Results: No treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by any participant over a 6-month time period. Of 12 participants,10 (83%) were able to perform BFA on themselves reliably after a didactic session. Pain relief from self-administration experienced by participants was comparable to that experienced when administered by a provider. Conclusions: In this small pilot study, self-administration of BFA was safe and effective for individuals who had previously received repeated benefit from provider-administered BFA. The contents do not represent the views of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs or the United States Government. This research is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT #: NCT04208659.

Dataset Information

Personalized electro-acupuncture versus auricular-acupuncture comparative effectiveness (PEACE): A protocol of a randomized controlled trial for chronic musculoskeletal pain in cancer survivors.

Publications

Personalized electro-acupuncture versus auricular-acupuncture comparative effectiveness (PEACE): A protocol of a randomized controlled trial for chronic musculoskeletal pain in cancer survivors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets