Comparing physicians' and patients' reporting on adverse reactions in randomized trials on acupuncture-a secondary data analysis

Safety of acupuncture in oncology: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Acupuncture is frequently used to treat the side effects of cancer treatment, but the safety of this intervention remains uncertain. The current meta-analysis was conducted to assess the safety of acupuncture in oncological patients.

METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus databases were searched from their inception to August 7, 2020. Randomized controlled trials in oncological patients comparing invasive acupuncture with sham acupuncture, treatment as usual (TAU), or any other active control were eligible. Two reviewers independently extracted data on study characteristics and adverse events (AEs). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.

RESULTS

Of 4590 screened articles, 65 were included in the analyses. The authors observed that acupuncture was not associated an with increased risk of intervention-related AEs, nonserious AEs, serious AEs, or dropout because of AEs compared with sham acupuncture and an active control. Compared with TAU, acupuncture was not associated with an increased risk of intervention-related AEs, serious AEs, or drop out because of AEs but was associated with an increased risk for nonserious AEs (odds ratio, 3.94; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-13.35; P = .03). However, the increased risk of nonserious AEs compared with TAU was not robust against selection bias. The meta-analyses may have been biased because of the insufficient reporting of AEs in the original randomized controlled trials.

CONCLUSIONS

The current review indicates that acupuncture is as safe as sham acupuncture and active controls in oncological patients. The authors recommend researchers heed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) safety and harm extension for reporting to capture the side effects and better investigate the risk profile of acupuncture in oncology.

LAY SUMMARY

According to this analysis, acupuncture is a safe therapy for the treatment of patients with cancer. Acupuncture seems to be safe compared with sham acupuncture and active controls.

Acupuncture-related adverse events: systematic review and meta-analyses of prospective clinical studies

OBJECTIVE

Overview on risks of acupuncture-related adverse events (AEs).

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analyses of prospective studies.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Scopus and Embase from inception date to 15 September 2019.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Prospective studies assessing AEs caused by needle acupuncture in humans as primary outcome published in English or German.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent researchers selected articles, extracted the data and assessed study quality. Overall risks and risks for different AE categories were obtained from random effects meta-analyses.

MAIN OUTCOMES

Overall risk of minor AEs and serious adverse events (SAEs) per patients and per treatments.

RESULTS

A total of 7679 publications were identified. Twenty-two articles reporting on 21 studies were included. Meta-analyses suggest at least one AE occurring in 9.31% (95% CI 5.10% to 14.62%, 11 studies) of patients undergoing an acupuncture series and in 7.57% (95% CI 1.43% to 17.95%, 5 studies) of treatments. Summary risk estimates for SAEs were 1.01 (95% CI 0.23 to 2.33, 11 studies) per 10 000 patients and 7.98 (95% CI 1.39 to 20.00, 14 studies) per one million treatments, for AEs requiring treatment 1.14 (95% CI 0.00 to 7.37, 8 studies) per 1000 patients. Heterogeneity was substantial (I2 >80%). On average, 9.4 AEs occurred in 100 treatments. Half of the AEs were bleeding, pain or flare at the needle site that are argued to represent intended acupuncture reaction. AE definitions and assessments varied largely.

CONCLUSION

Acupuncture can be considered among the safer treatments in medicine. SAEs are rare, and the most common minor AEs are very mild. AEs requiring medical management are uncommon but necessitate medical competence to assure patient safety. Clinical and methodological heterogeneity call for standardised AE assessments tools, clear criteria for differentiating acupuncture-related AEs from therapeutically desired reactions, and identification of patient-related risk factors for AEs.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020151930.