Evidence mapPaperPMID 41555151Full record

ReviewJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2026

Recommendations for cancer related fatigue in post-treatment survivorship care: a cross-sectional analysis of guidelines.

Joshua Ayoson, Nadine Schneider, Sacha I Rothschild, Katharina Gut-Fischer, Eva Haegler-Laube, Maria M Wertli

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Joshua AyosonDepartment of Internal Medicine, Cantonal Hospital of Baden, Baden, Switzerland. Joshua.ayoson@ksb.ch.
Nadine SchneiderDepartment of Internal Medicine, Cantonal Hospital of Baden, Baden, Switzerland.
Sacha I RothschildDepartment of Internal Medicine, Cantonal Hospital of Baden, Baden, Switzerland.
Katharina Gut-FischerDepartment of Internal Medicine, Cantonal Hospital of Baden, Baden, Switzerland.
Eva Haegler-Laube *Department of Internal Medicine, Cantonal Hospital of Baden, Baden, Switzerland.
Maria M Wertli *Department of Internal Medicine, Cantonal Hospital of Baden, Baden, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectiveExisting guidelines for the management of cancer-related fatigue (CRF) differ in scope, evidence strength, and implementation strategies, limiting consistent integration into post-treatment survivorship care. This study systematically evaluates and compares recommendations to identify best practices, highlight evidence gaps, and provide actionable insights for clinicians and policymakers.

methodsA systematic search was conducted across PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and professional society websites. Included were all guidelines from professional oncology societies addressing CRF management in adult cancer survivors and published in English between 2000 and December 2024. From 524 references screened, eleven (11) guidelines from eight (8) professional societies met the inclusion criteria and were analysed. The quality of the guidelines was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) criteria. Recommendations, their strength of evidence and strength of recommendations were extracted and standardized into the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. The screening, grading, and extraction process was performed by two reviewers independently.

resultThe quality of the eleven guidelines was high in three (27%), moderate in seven (64%), and poor in one (9%). Based on a moderate level of evidence, CRF should be screened at every patient encounter by all healthcare providers, with positive screens followed by referral to appropriate professionals for further assessment using one of several validated tools. A strong recommendation based on moderate evidence was for exercise. In particular, aerobic and resistance training of low to moderate intensity, three times per week for 12 weeks was recommended. Guidelines consistently issued a strong recommendation for CBT (moderate evidence), and for psychotherapy (variable evidence). CBT was recommended, especially with structured coping strategies or web-based delivery. Guidelines cautiously recommended mind-body interventions such as Yoga, Tai Chi, and Qigong based on variable strength of evidence and recommendation. Education andcounselling (particularly for depression-related fatigue) are mainly based on expert consensus rather than strong clinical trials. Other options may be considered in individual patients but are not supported by strong evidence.

conclusionThis guideline analysis demonstrates broad support for continued CRF screening during survivorship care, followed by assessment of contributing factors when fatigue is identified. Exercise, especially low- to moderate-intensity aerobic and resistance training, and cognitive behavioral therapy are consistently recommended across guidelines as effective interventions. Psychoeducation and counselling are also beneficial, especially for fatigue linked to mental health conditions. Pharmacological treatments are not recommended due to insufficient evidence and side effects. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Cancer survivors are encouraged to report ongoing fatigue and seek supportive care, given the availability of effective non-drug interventions.

Indexed as

Cancer-related fatigueCancer survivorshipClinical practice guidelinesNon-pharmacological interventionsQuality of life

Identifiers

PMID41555151

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.