Trial reportBMC complementary medicine and therapies2026
Acupuncture vs. sham acupuncture for cancer-related fatigue in patients with breast cancer: a double-center, randomized, single-blind pilot study.
Trial report in BMC complementary medicine and therapies, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveCancer-related fatigue is highly prevalent among cancer patients. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of acupuncture on fatigue levels and quality of life in breast cancer patients with cancer-related fatigue.
methodsThis pilot study employed a double-center, randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled design. A total of 68 breast cancer patients with cancer-related fatigue who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were recruited and randomly allocated into either an acupuncture group (n = 34) or a sham acupuncture group (n = 34). Both groups selected the same acupoints: CV12, CV4, CV6, LI4 (bilaterally), KI3 (bilaterally), ST36 (bilaterally), and SP6 (bilaterally). The acupuncture group employed traditional acupuncture techniques to insert needles into the acupoints to elicit the deqi sensation. By contrast, the sham acupuncture group utilized blunt needles that did not penetrate the skin. Both groups underwent a 6-week treatment regimen consisting of 20 sessions (4 sessions per week during weeks 1–3 (approximately every other day) and a total of 8 sessions during weeks 4–6 (2–3 sessions per week, every 2–3 days), each lasting 30 min). Changes in scores on the brief fatigue inventory (BFI), fatigue scale-14 (FS-14), and hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) were assessed at week 0, 6, 8, and 10. Additionally, compliance with and safety of acupuncture were documented. Research variables between the two groups were compared using a significance level of p < 0.05.
resultsThe study revealed a time-dependent therapeutic advantage of acupuncture over sham acupuncture. While both groups showed similar short-term reductions in fatigue (BFI: acupuncture 6.69 ± 1.66 vs. sham acupuncture 6.19 ± 1.60; between-group p = 0.223) and psychological distress at week 6 after treatment, acupuncture demonstrated progressively amplified benefits. During the 10-week follow-up period, acupuncture achieved significantly greater reductions in fatigue severity (BFI: Δ = -1.28, p = 0.011; FS-14: Δ = -1.81, p = 0.003) and psychological symptoms (HADS-A: Δ = -2.06, p = 0.006; HADS-D: Δ = -1.81, p = 0.003), with intergroup differences widening over time (week 8 vs. week 10). Both groups exhibited full compliance, and acupuncture-related adverse events were limited to mild ecchymosis (9.4%). These findings suggest acupuncture induces time-dependent modulation beyond placebo effects.
conclusionAcupuncture can sustainably and effectively alleviate fatigue symptoms in cancer patients, improve their anxiety and depressive symptoms, and demonstrate high safety and compliance.
trial registrationThis clinical trial was prospectively registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2300069361; 14/03/2023) ( https://www.chictr.org.cn/ ).
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.