ReviewCancers2022
Does the Choice of Anaesthesia Affect Cancer? A Molecular Crosstalk between Theory and Practice.
Review in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- In Vitro Effects of Anaesthetic Compounds on a Panel of Solid Tumour Cell Lines-An Exploratory Study.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2026Article
- Non-anesthetic Effects of Anesthetics and Organ Protection.Current neuropharmacology · 2026Review
- Correction: Debel et al. Does the Choice of Anaesthesia Affect Cancer? A Molecular Crosstalk between Theory and Practice.Cancers · 2025Article
- Propofol Total Intravenous Anesthesia for Pediatric Proton Radiotherapy and Its Effect on Patient Outcomes.Cancers · 2025Article
- Anesthesia-related postoperative oncological surgical outcomes: a comparison of total intravenous anesthesia and volatile anesthesia. A meta-analysis.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, there has been an increasing scientific interest in the interaction between anaesthesia and cancer development. Retrospective studies show that the choice of anaesthetics may influence cancer outcome and cancer recurrence; however, these studies show contradictory results. Recently, some large randomized clinical trials have been completed, yet they show no significant effect of anaesthetics on cancer outcomes. In this scoping review, we compiled a body of in vivo and in vitro studies with the goal of evaluating the biological effects of anaesthetics on cancer cells in comparison to clinical effects as described in recent studies. It was found that sevoflurane, propofol, opioids and lidocaine are likely to display direct biological effects on cancer cells; however, significant effects are only found in studies with exposure to high concentrations of anaesthetics and/or during longer exposure times. When compared to clinical data, these differences in exposure and dose-effect relation, as well as tissue selectivity, population selection and unclear anaesthetic dosing protocols might explain the lack of outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.