Learn about the medical, dental, pharmacy, behavioral, and voluntary benefits your employer may offer.
This cancer information summary provides an overview of the use of acupuncture as a treatment for individuals with cancer or cancer-related disorders. The summary includes a brief history of acupuncture practice, a review of laboratory and animal studies, the results of clinical observations and trials, and possible side effects of acupuncture therapy. Information presented in some sections of the summary can also be found in tables located at the end of those sections.
This summary contains the following key information:
Many of the medical and scientific terms used in this summary are hypertext linked (at first use in each section) to the
Reference citations in some PDQ cancer information summaries may include links to external websites that are operated by individuals or organizations for the purpose of marketing or advocating the use of specific treatments or products. These reference citations are included for informational purposes only. Their inclusion should not be viewed as an endorsement of the content of the websites, or of any treatment or product, by the PDQ Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies Editorial Board or the National Cancer Institute.
Acupuncture, a complementary therapy used in symptom management,[
Cancer patients are receptive to receiving acupuncture for symptom control. A 2018 cross-sectional study of breast cancer survivors showed that an equal percentage of patients preferred acupuncture versus medication for pain management.[
More than 40 states and the District of Columbia have laws regulating acupuncture practice. The National Certification Commission for Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine offers national certification examinations for practitioners of acupuncture and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) (
Acupuncture has been practiced in China and other Asian countries for more than 4,000 years.[
Acupuncture is closely associated with Chinese meridian theory. According to this theory, there are 12 primary meridians, or channels, and eight additional meridians, each following a particular directional course along the body. A vital energy known as qi flows through these meridians and participates in the homeostatic regulation of various bodily functions. Along the meridians are approximately 360 points that serve as both pathognomonic signs of disorder and as loci for acupuncture treatments.[
Classical techniques of acupuncture include the following:
Acupressure, using fingers or mechanical devices to apply pressure on acupuncture points is based on the same principles as acupuncture. Moxibustion is a method in which an herb (Artemisia vulgaris) is burned above the skin or on an acupuncture point for the purpose of warming it to alleviate symptoms. Cupping promotes blood circulation and stimulates acupuncture points by creating a vacuum or negative pressure on the surface of the skin.[
In addition to classical acupuncture techniques, other techniques have been developed and are sometimes used in cancer management. These include trigger point acupuncture, laser acupuncture, acupuncture point injection, and techniques focusing on particular regions of the body such as:
Of these, auricular acupuncture is the most commonly used.
In clinical practice, most acupuncturists in the United States use the traditional theories and principles of Chinese medicine. A 2017 survey of 472 licensed acupuncturists in the San Francisco Bay area reported that 77% were caring for patients with cancer, and 44% have training specific to the needs of patients with cancer.[
Although acupuncture has been practiced for millennia, it has come under rigorous scientific investigation only recently. In 1976, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) classified acupuncture needles as investigational devices (class III) (
These actions by the FDA and NIH have resulted in the establishment of several active programs of research into the mechanisms and efficacy of acupuncture, much of which is, or is potentially, relevant to cancer management. The most extensively investigated aspect of these mechanisms has been the effect of acupuncture on pain management. The NIH Consensus Panel concluded that "acupuncture can cause multiple biological responses," local and distal, "mediated mainly by sensory neurons …within the central nervous system." Acupuncture "may also activate the hypothalamus and the pituitary gland, resulting in a broad spectrum of systemic effects," including "alterations in peptides, hormones and neurotransmitters and the regulation of blood flow."[
Although the mechanism of acupuncture is not fully understood, it has been proposed that beneficial results are mediated by changes in neurohormones and cytokines. Animal research suggests that acupuncture achieves its anesthetic effect by stimulating nerves in the muscle, which then relay the signal to the spinal cord, midbrain, and hypothalamus-pituitary system, ultimately triggering release of neurotransmitters and hormones, such as endorphins and enkephalins.[
Laboratory and animal cancer studies have also explored the mechanisms of acupuncture through the activation and modulation of the immune system. Previous animal and human studies have suggested that acupuncture worked through immunomodulation, with significant changes in cytokines including interleukin (IL)-1, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, and tumor necrosis factor -alpha (TNF-alpha).[
Acupuncture treatment points are located by using standard anatomic landmarks and comparative anatomy. EA is the most commonly used treatment intervention; a few studies have used moxibustion.[
Although several studies published in China examined the effect of acupuncture on the human immune system,[
A 2018 retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of 375 cancer survivors who received acupuncture treatments at the MD Anderson Cancer Center Integrative Medicine Center outpatient clinic showed that patients experienced short- and long-term improvement in multiple symptoms including hot flashes, fatigue, numbness, tingling, and nausea.[
References:
The generally accepted history of acupuncture /moxibustion (known as zhen jiu) is part of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), an indigenous, coherent system of medicine that has been practiced in China for thousands of years. The history of acupuncture/moxibustion in China can be traced back archaeologically at least 4,000 years, when bian (stone needles) were in use. During the long history of recorded practice, acupuncture has been applied to many disorders. The earliest written medical text, the ancient classic Huang Di Nei Jing (Yellow Emperor's Inner Classic, second century BC), records nine types of needles and their therapeutic functions.
The dissemination of acupuncture and TCM to other regions dates back centuries, first to Korea and Japan and then to other Asian countries.[
For centuries, Chinese acupuncturists treated cancer symptomatically. Ancient literature and acupuncture textbooks classify cancer as a Zhi syndrome or blood stasis condition and document acupuncture treatment principles and methods.[
References:
At least seven animal studies investigating the effects of acupuncture in cancer or cancer-related conditions have been reported in the scientific literature.[
The four ex vivo studies suggested that acupuncture is useful in anticancer therapy either by actively stimulating immune activity or by preventing chemotherapy suppression of immune activity.[
In a study involving normal rats, electroacupuncture (EA) (1 Hz, 5–20 V, 1-millisecond pulse width, 2 hours) applied at the point Zu-Sanli (S36) for 2 hours daily on 3 consecutive days enhanced the cytotoxicity of splenic natural killer (NK) cells compared with a stimulation of a nonacupuncture control point in the abdominal muscle.[
Another study found that NK cell activity and T-lymphocyte transformation rate were increased in a mouse model of transplanted mammary cancer compared with a control (P < .05) after eight sessions of acupuncture and moxibustion.[
A study involving tumor -bearing mice (sarcoma S180) using moxibustion to warm the acupuncture point Guanyuan (CV4) once a day for 10 days found significantly increased production of erythrocytes, compared with a nontreatment control.[
The fourth ex vivo study used a rat model to investigate the effect of EA on nerve growth factor (NGF), which is associated with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Women with PCOS have an increased risk of endometrial cancer and other diseases. Repeated EA treatments (12 treatments administered over 30 days) in PCO rats significantly lowered the concentrations of NGF in the ovaries, compared with untreated PCO rats.[
A study of cyclophosphamide -induced emesis in a ferret behavioral model used acupuncture as an adjunct therapy in treating the emetic side effects of chemotherapy. EA at 100 Hz, 1.5 V, for 10 minutes in combination with subeffective doses of antiemetics such as ondansetron (0.04 mg/kg), droperidol (0.25 mg/kg), and metoclopramide (2.24 mg/kg) significantly reduced the total number of emetic episodes by 52%, 36%, and 73%, respectively (P < .01), in this ferret model.[
A rat model has been established by injecting AT-3.1 prostate cancer cells into the tibia of the adult male Copenhagen rat, which closely mimics prostate cancer-induced bone cancer pain.[
Another cutaneous cancer pain model has been established by injecting B16-BL6 melanoma cells into the plantar region of one hind paw of C57BL/6 mice. A single EA treatment showed significant analgesia on day 8 but not on day 20. EA treatments once every other day starting on day 8 showed analgesia at day 20, but EA starting on day 16 did not. The results indicate that EA exerts antihyperalgesic effects on early stage but not on late stage cutaneous cancer pain.[
The findings of these studies suggest that acupuncture may be effective in treating cancer-related symptoms and cancer treatment–related disorders and that acupuncture may be able to activate immune functions [
References:
Effect of Acupuncture on Immune Function
There has been limited research, mostly performed in China, evaluating the effect of acupuncture on immune system function in cancer patients, suggesting that acupuncture improves immune function.[
Effect of Acupuncture on Cancer Pain
Clinical studies and reviews of acupuncture as a treatment for cancer-related pain have been reported in the English language (see Table 1).[
One randomized trial compared classical Chinese acupuncture, acupuncture point injection with freeze-dried human transfer factor, and conventional analgesic treatment in patients with gastric cancer pain.[
A randomized, blinded, controlled trial (N = 90) reported that cancer pain intensity was significantly decreased (by 36%) in an auricular acupuncture treatment group, in comparison with control groups (by 2%, acupuncture at placebo points or auricular seeds placed at placebo points) after 2 months of treatment (P < .001).[
Although most of these studies were positive and demonstrated the effectiveness of acupuncture in cancer pain control, the findings have limited significance because of methodologic weaknesses such as small sample sizes, an absence of patient blinding to treatment in most cases, varying acupuncture treatment regimens, a lack of standard outcome measurements, and an absence of adequate randomization. A 2015 Cochrane systematic review of five RCTs reported benefits of acupuncture in reducing pancreatic cancer pain, pain from late-stage cancer, and chronic cancer-related neuropathic pain; the study found no difference between real and sham electroacupuncture (EA) for ovarian cancer pain.[
In addition, a 2016 systematic review and meta-analysis of 1,639 participants with cancer-related pain in 20 RCTs with a high risk of bias showed that acupuncture alone was not superior to conventional drug therapy, although acupuncture plus drug therapy appeared to be superior to drug therapy alone.[
Most acupuncture cancer pain clinical trials use conventional body acupuncture. A 2020 clinical trial studied the effect of wrist-ankle acupuncture in combination with auricular acupuncture to treat cancer pain and showed that the combination therapy is effective in reducing pain and analgesic medication usage.[
Reference | Trial Design | Type of Pain | Treatment Groups (Enrolled; Treated; Placebo or No Treatment Control)b | Treatment Duration | Concurrent TherapyUsed (Yes/No/ Unknown)c | Level of Evidence Score and Resultsd |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RCT = randomized controlled trial; VAS = visual analog scale. | ||||||
a For additional information and definition of terms, see the |
||||||
b Number of patients treated plus number of patient controls may not equal number of patients enrolled; number of patients enrolled equals number of patients initially recruited/considered by the researchers who conducted a study; number of patients treated equals number of enrolled patients who were given the treatment being studied AND for whom results were reported. | ||||||
c Concurrent therapy for symptoms treated (not cancer). | ||||||
d Strongest evidence reported that the treatment under study has activity or otherwise improves the well-being of cancer patients. For information about levels of evidence analysis and scores, see Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies. | ||||||
e P< .05, acupuncture treatment versus conventional analgesics. | ||||||
f P< .0001, acupuncture versus placebo. | ||||||
[ |
RCT | Gastric cancer pain | 48; 16 (acupuncture), 16 (acupuncture point injection of freeze-dried human transfer factor); 16 (conventional analgesics) | 2 mo | No | 1iiC; in long-term treatment, equal or better analgesia than conventionaldrugs e |
[ |
RCT | Cancer pain | 90; 28 (auricular acupuncture); 51 (acupuncture at placebo points in ear or auricular seeds fixed at placebo points with adhesive) | 2 mo | Yes, analgesics and co-analgesics, includingtricyclic antidepressantsandantiepileptics | 1sC; pain intensity decreased by 36% at 2 monthsf |
[ |
Nonconsecutive case series | Cancer-related pain | 183; 183; none | Unknown | Yes, analgesics | 3iC; 95 (52%) "significantly helped" |
Effect of Acupuncture on Cancer Treatment–Related Side Effects
Pain
Acupuncture for postsurgical pain
Five RCTs published in English have addressed the use of acupuncture for pain related to cancer treatment, mostly postsurgical pain (see Table 2). One RCT of 106 cancer patients who experienced postthoracotomy pain showed no statistical difference in the real acupuncture (RA) group compared with the sham acupuncture (SA) group in patients' pain scores measured by the Brief Pain Inventory at the 30-, 60-, and 90-day follow-up.[
One RCT (N = 93) compared acupuncture with massage therapy and usual care in controlling postoperative pain, nausea, vomiting, and depressive moods.[
Another study showed that in cancer patients with chronic pain or dysfunction as a result of neck dissection, four weekly acupuncture treatments significantly reduced pain and improved function compared with standard care alone.[
Acupressure has been shown to be efficacious in reducing procedural pain. Two RCTs showed that acupressure at LI4 and HT7 significantly reduced patients' pain and anxiety.[
Reference | Type of Pain | Treatment Groups (Enrolled; Treated; Placebo or No Treatment Control)b | Treatment Duration | Concurrent Therapy Used (Yes/No/ Unknown)c | Results | Level of Evidence Scored |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BMAB = Bone marrow aspiration and biopsy; CI = confidence interval; EA = electroacupuncture; SA = sham acupuncture. | ||||||
a For additional information and definition of terms, see the |
||||||
b Number of patients treated plus number of patient controls may not equal number of patients enrolled; number of patients enrolled equals number of patients initially recruited/considered by the researchers who conducted a study; number of patients treated equals number of enrolled patients who were given the treatment being studied AND for whom results were reported. | ||||||
c Concurrent therapy for symptoms treated (not cancer). | ||||||
d Strongest evidence reported that the treatment under study has activity or otherwise improves the well-being of cancer patients. For information about levels of evidence analysis and scores, see Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies. | ||||||
e P = .038, acupuncture and massage versus usual care. | ||||||
f P = .008, acupuncture versus usual care. | ||||||
g P ≤ .01, acupuncture versus usual care. | ||||||
h P< .001, acupuncture versus usual care. | ||||||
[ |
Postthoracotomy pain | 106; 52 (intradermal acupuncture); 54 (SA) | 1 mo | Unknown | No difference between the two groups | 1sC |
[ |
Postoperative pain | 138; 93 (acupuncture and massage); 45 (usual care) | 2 d | Massage | The treatment group reported less paine | 1iiC |
[ |
Pain and dysfunction in patients with cancer and a history of neck dissection | 58; 28; 30 (usual care) | Weekly for 4 wk | Unknown | Constant-Murley scores improved more in the acupuncture group (adjusted difference between groups = 11.2; 95% CI, 3.0–19.3)f | 1iiC |
[ |
Postoperative pain in breast cancer patients | 80; 48; 32 (usual care) | Postoperative d 3, 5, 7 and day ofdischarge | Unknown | The acupuncture group had improved postoperative paing and range of movementh | 1iiC |
[ |
BMAB pain | 77; 37; 40 (sham acupressure) | During the BMAB (11–12 min) | Yes, local analgesics | Acupressure reduced severe pain compared with sham acupressure | 1sC |
[ |
BMAB | 90; 30 (acupressure at LI4), 30 (acupressure at HT7); 30 (sham acupressure) | 2 min after the start and end of biopsy | Yes,lidocaine | Reduced anxiety and pain in treatment group | 1sC |
Acupuncture for aromatase inhibitor-associated musculoskeletal symptoms
A 2012 meta-analysis of 29 trials with 17,922 patients found that RA is more beneficial than both SA and no acupuncture in the treatment of chronic pain, with a modest effect size of 0.23 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13–0.33).[
Three meta-analyses [
All studies included in the meta-analyses [
Further extending the literature supporting the efficacy of acupuncture in treating AIMSS, an RCT was conducted using 226 participants (SWOG-S1200 [NCT01535066]) randomly assigned to three groups (MA, SA, and WLC) and found improvements in joint pain after treatment when compared with SA and WLC.[
Reference | Trial Design | Treatment Groups (Enrolled; Treated; Placebo or No Treatment Control)b | Treatment Durationc | Concurrent Therapy Used (Yes/No/ Unknown)d | Results | Level of Evidence Scoree |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AIMSS = aromatase inhibitor-induced musculoskeletal symptoms; EA = electroacupuncture; RA = real acupuncture; RCT = randomized controlled trial; SA = sham acupuncture; WLC = wait-list control. | ||||||
a For additional information and definition of terms, see the |
||||||
b Number of patients treated plus number of patient controls may not equal number of patients enrolled; number of patients enrolled equals number of patients initially recruited/considered by the researchers who conducted a study; number of patients treated equals number of enrolled patients who were given the treatment being studied AND for whom results were reported. | ||||||
c Represents primary outcome analysis time point; certain studies may have an extended intervention period. | ||||||
d Concurrent therapy for symptoms treated (not cancer). | ||||||
e Strongest evidence reported that the treatment under study has activity or otherwise improves the well-being of cancer patients. For information about levels of evidence analysis and scores, see Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies. | ||||||
[ |
RCT | 226; 110 (RA); 59 (SA), 57 (WLC) | Twice weekly for 6 wk, then once weekly for the following 6 wk for a total of 12 wk | Yes, non-opioid analgesics | Statistically significant reduction in joint pain at 6 weeks in the RA group compared with SA and WLC groups | 1sC |
[ |
RCT | 38; 20 (RA); 18 (SA) | Twice weekly for 6 wk | Yes, non-opioid analgesics | RA significantly reduced AIMSS more than did SA | 1sC |
[ |
RCT | 47; 23 (RA); 24 (SA/park device) | Weekly acupuncture or SA for 8 wk | Unknown | No significant difference between two groups | 1sC |
[ |
Pilot study | 29; 14 (real EA); 15 (sham EA) | Twice weekly for 6 wk | Yes, non-opioid analgesics | No significant differences in outcome measures between two groups | 1sC |
Acupuncture for musculoskeletal pain in cancer survivors
In the 2021 Personalized Electroacupuncture versus Auricular Acupuncture Comparativeness Effectiveness (PEACE) trial, 360 cancer survivors with moderate to severe musculoskeletal pain (without evidence of disease) for at least 3 months were randomly assigned in a 2:2:1 ratio to receive electroacupuncture (EA), auricular acupuncture (AA), or usual care. Both EA and AA significantly reduced average pain severity on a 0 to 10–point pain scale (EA, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.4–2.4; AA, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.0–2.1) when compared with usual care. Because of ear pain, 10.5% of patients dropped out the AA group.[
Nausea and vomiting
Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting
Of all the investigated effects of acupuncture on cancer-related or chemotherapy-related symptoms and disorders, the positive effect of acupuncture on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (N/V) is the most convincing, as demonstrated by the consistency of the results of a variety of clinical study types, including RCTs, nonrandomized trials, prospective consecutive case series, and retrospective studies (see Table 4). Consistent with the findings from clinical studies of acupuncture on N/V due to other causes (i.e., postoperative N/V and morning sickness), these studies showed acupuncture to be effective in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced N/V (CINV).
A 2013 systematic review of literature on acupuncture in cancer care screened 2,151 publications and identified 41 RCTs studying the effect of using acupuncture to treat eight cancer treatment–related symptoms (pain, nausea, hot flashes, fatigue, radiation-induced xerostomia, prolonged postoperative ileus, anxiety/mood disorders, and sleep disturbance). The review concluded that acupuncture is an appropriate adjunctive treatment for CINV, but additional studies are needed because most RCTs had unclear bias or a high risk of bias.[
In 2005, a comprehensive meta-analysis of 11 RCTs (N = 1,247) evaluating the effect of acupuncture-point stimulation in controlling CINV showed that acupuncture-point stimulation significantly reduced the proportion of acute vomiting (relative risk, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69–0.99, P = .04),[
The trials in the meta-analysis were published between 1987 and 2003, and the sample sizes ranged from ten patients in the smallest trial [
A meta-analysis of acupuncture in N/V is the most comprehensive summary of clinical research on the role of acupuncture-point stimulation in controlling CINV. It found that acupuncture-point stimulation decreases the proportion of patients who experience acute chemotherapy-induced vomiting and concurred with the previous systemic review and meta-analysis.[
The National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference held in 1997 reviewed studies that evaluated the safety and efficacy of acupuncture in treating postoperative- and CINV.[
The acupuncture point specificity is worth mentioning because most of the earlier acupuncture CINV trials used the PC6 acupuncture point and showed positive results. A well-designed, randomized, placebo-controlled trial published in 2014 showed that K1 acupoint acustimulation combined with antiemetics did not prevent cisplatin -induced or oxaliplatin -induced nausea in 103 liver cancer patients who underwent a transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) procedure.[
A 2016 RCT showed that among 48 breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy, patients randomly assigned to the auricular acupressure group (ear seed placed on point zero, stomach, brainstem, shenmen, and cardia) had significantly less intense and less frequent N/V in acute and delayed phases compared with the control group that had no auricular acupressure.[
Researchers have attempted to augment the impact of acupressure on the antiemetic effects using certain methods, but they were not found to be effective.[
A 2017 RCT that compared acupuncture with SA in 60 multiple myeloma patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation (BMT) showed that even though acupuncture did not significantly improve overall symptoms during and 15 days after BMT compared with SA, it was significantly more efficacious in reducing nausea, lack of appetite, and drowsiness at 15 days after BMT.[
A 2020 RCT examined the effect of real acupuncture versus sham acupuncture in reducing CINV among 134 patients with advanced cancer. Patients received treatment twice a day on the first day of chemotherapy and once a day for the next 4 days. No significant difference was found between the two groups.[
Radiation-induced nausea and vomiting
Acupuncture has also been used to relieve radiation-induced N/V. In one randomized study, patients who were randomly assigned to receive either verum or SA experienced fewer episodes of N/V than did those who received standard care.[
Reference | Condition or Cancer Type | Treatment Groups (Enrolled; Treated; Placebo or No Treatment Control)b | Treatment Duration | Concurrent Therapy Used (Yes/No/Unknown)c | Resultsd | Level of Evidence Scoree |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ANC =absolute neutrophil count; EA = electroacupuncture; N/V = nausea and vomiting; RA = real acupuncture; SA = sham acupuncture. | ||||||
a For additional information and definition of terms, see the |
||||||
b Number of patients treated plus number of patient controls may not equal number of patients enrolled; number of patients enrolled equals number of patients initially considered by the researcher who conducted a study; number of patients treated equals number of enrolled patients who were given the treatment being studied AND for whom results were reported;historical control subjectsare not included in number of patients enrolled. | ||||||
c Concurrent therapy for symptoms treated (not cancer). | ||||||
d These results indicate statistically significant differences unless stated otherwise. | ||||||
e Strongest evidence reported that the treatment under study has activity or improves the well-being of cancer patients. For information about levels of evidence analysis and scores, see Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies. | ||||||
f P< .001, low-frequency EA at classical antiemetic acupuncture points daily versus minimalneedlingat control points with sham EA versus no adjunct needling. | ||||||
g P< .05, acupuncture versusnoninvasiveplacebo acupuncture. | ||||||
h P< .001, EA versus sham EA. | ||||||
i P< .001,surface electrodesversus rubber electrodes. | ||||||
j P< .00059. | ||||||
k P< .05, acupressure and acustimulation wrist bands versus no treatment. | ||||||
l P< .02, acupressure versus acupressure at a sham point. | ||||||
Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting | ||||||
[ |
Breast | 104; 37 (electroacupuncture), 33 (sham electrostimulation); 34 (no needling) | 5 d | Yes,prochlorperazine | Less N/V in EA groupf | 1sC |
[ |
Various advanced cancers | 158; 68 (RA); 66 (SA) | 5 days | Yes,dexamethasone,ondansetron | No significant differences between groups | 1sC |
[ |
Various cancers | 80; 41 (acupuncture); 39 (noninvasive placebo acupuncture) | Unknown | Yes, ondansetron | No significant differences between groupsg | 1sC |
[ |
Ovarian | 142; 48 (acupuncture +vitamin B6PC6 point injection), 48 (acupuncture); 46 (vitamin B6) | 3 wk | Yes, granisetron | Significantly less emesis compared with control | 1iiC |
[ |
Testicular | 10; 10 (EA); 10 (sham EA) crossover study | Unknown | Yes, metoclopramide | Significantly less N/V compared with controlh | 1sC |
[ |
Unknown | 100; 27 (surface electrodes), 11 (rubber electrodes), 24 (transcutaneous electrical stimulation); 14 (crossover study) | 5 d | Yes, metoclopramide,thiethylperazine, prochlorperazine, cyclizine | Significantly less N/V compared with controli | 1iiC |
[ |
Unknown | 16; 16 (ondansetron plus transcutaneous electrical stimulation); 16 (crossover treatment ondansetron only) | 5 d | Yes, ondansetron | Significantly less N/V compared with controlj | 1iiC |
[ |
Liver or livermetastasisfrom other primary cancer | 103; 51 (acustimulation at K1 acupoint); 52 (electrostimulation at placebo point on heel) | 5 d | Yes,tropisetron | No significant differences between the groups | 1sC |
[ |
Breast, hematologic neoplasms | 739; 233 (acupressure bands), 229 (transcutaneous electrical stimulation bands); 232 (no bands) | 5 d | Yes, 5-HT3 receptorantagonist, prochlorperazine, and/or others | Significantly less N/V in treatment groups compared with controlk | 1iiC |
[ |
Unknown | 53; 38 (acupressure); 38 (crossover to acupressure at a sham point) | Unknown | Yes, antiemetics | Significantly less N/V compared with controll | 1sC |
[ |
Breast | 36; 17; 19 | 5 d | Yes, antiemetics | Significantly less N/V compared with control | 1iiC |
[ |
Breast | 160; 53 (acupressure P6 - active); 53 (acupressure S13 - placebo), 54 (usual care) | 10 d | Yes, antiemetic | Significantly less delayed N/V for acupressure compared with control | 1sC |
Post-Bone Marrow Transplantation | ||||||
[ |
Multiple myeloma | 60; 29 (RA); 31 (SA) | 5 d for 20 min each treatment or until ANC dropped below 200/μl orplateletcount dropped below 20,000/μl | Yes | Acupuncture group had less severe symptoms of nausea, appetite loss, and drowsiness than SA | 1sC |
Radiation-Induced Nausea and Vomiting | ||||||
[ |
Various cancers | 277; 109 (acupuncture), 106 (SA); 62 (standard care) | Six treatments | Yes, antiemetics | Significantly less emesis compared with control | 1sC |
Vasomotor symptoms
Some studies have reported that acupuncture may be effective in reducing vasomotor symptoms among postmenopausal women with breast cancer and prostate cancer patients receiving androgen-deprivation therapy.[
Six RCTs have studied the role of acupuncture in reducing hot flashes in breast cancer survivors.
In 2007, one study reported results from a randomized, sham-controlled trial on the effect of acupuncture in treating breast cancer survivors who experienced three or more hot flashes per day.[
In 2009, one study reported another randomized SA-controlled trial on the effect of acupuncture in treating women with breast cancer who suffered from hot flashes after receiving tamoxifen for at least 3 months.[
Another clinical trial compared the effects of EA with hormonal therapy in breast cancer survivors with vasomotor symptoms; in 19 of 27 women who completed 12 weeks of EA treatment, the number of hot flashes was significantly reduced from 9.6 per day to 4.3 per day. The improvement persisted at the 12-month follow up.[
In 2010, another RCT compared the effect of acupuncture with venlafaxine in treating vasomotor symptoms in breast cancer patients suffering from more than 13 hot flashes per week.[
In 2013, a study reported the results of a three-arm RCT (N = 94) comparing RA (N = 31) with SA (N = 29) and usual care alone (N = 34) in reducing hot flashes in breast cancer survivors. In the acupuncture group, 16 (52%) patients experienced a significant reduction in hot flashes compared with 7 (24%) in the SA group (P < .05). There was also a statistically positive effect on sleep when RA was compared with SA. Importantly, the researchers measured the plasma estradiol level and determined that there was not a correlation between symptoms improvement and an increase in estradiol level.[
In 2014, a study reported the results of a two-arm RCT (N = 47) on the effect of acupuncture in reducing AIMSS and hot flashes as one of the secondary end points. When compared with baseline, acupuncture significantly improved hot-flash severity, frequency, and function. SA significantly improved the Hot Flash Related Daily Interference Scale only. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups.[
These trials once again confirmed that acupuncture is safe. They showed that acupuncture reduced hot flashes significantly when compared with baseline, although the benefit of RA versus SA was not clear.
A 2015 systematic review of acupuncture to control hot flashes in cancer patients showed that in all eight studies included in the review, acupuncture resulted in significant improvement from the baseline, and three studies showed RA was significantly better than SA in different aspects of hot flashes. However, none of the studies were rated with a low risk of bias.[
A study published in 2015 that used EA in the treatment of hot flashes randomly assigned 120 breast cancer survivors who were suffering from hot flashes at least twice daily to one of four of the following arms: EA, SA, gabapentin (GP), and placebo pills (PP) for 8 weeks.[
A 2016 pragmatic RCT (N = 190) that compared individualized acupuncture plus enhanced self-care (as described in an information booklet provided to all patients) with enhanced self-care alone showed that the combination therapy is superior to self-care alone in reducing hot flash scores at the end of treatment, at the 3-month follow-up visit, and at the 6-month follow-up visit.[
Reference | Treatment Groups (Enrolled; Treated; Placebo or No Treatment Control)b | Treatment Duration | Concurrent Therapy Used (Yes/No/Unknown)c | Results | Level of Evidence Scored |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
EA = electroacupuncture; GA = gabapentin; HFRDI = hot flash–related daily interference scale; hr = hour(s); HT = hormone therapy; RA = real acupuncture; SA = sham acupuncture; SNRI = serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor; SSRI =selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. | |||||
a For additional information and definition of terms, see the |
|||||
b Number of patients treated plus number of patient controls may not equal number of patients enrolled; number of patients enrolled equals number of patients initially recruited/considered by the researchers who conducted a study; number of patients treated equals number of enrolled patients who were given the treatment being studied AND for whom results were reported. | |||||
c Concurrent therapy for symptoms treated (not cancer). | |||||
d For information about levels of evidence analysis and scores, see Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies. | |||||
e P< .001, acupuncture versus hormone therapy. | |||||
f P< .05, acupuncture versus placebo versus usual care. | |||||
[ |
190; 85 (RA and enhanced self-care); 105 (enhanced self-care) | 12 wk | Yes, HT | Significantly fewer hot flashes than control. | 1iiC |
[ |
72; 42 (RA); 30 (SA) | 4 wk | Yes, SSRIs | RA was associated with 0.8 fewer hot flashes per day than SA at 6 wk. No statistically significant differences. | 1sC |
[ |
59; 30 (RA); 29 (SA) | 10 wk | No | Hot flash frequency and Kupperman index were reduced during the treatment period and during the 12-week follow-up. | 1sC |
[ |
45; 27 (EA); 18 (HT) | 24 mo | Yes, estrogen/progesterone | The median number of hot flashes/24 hr decreased from baseline to 12 wk of treatment in both groupse. | 1iiC |
[ |
50; 25 (RA); 25 (venlafaxine) | 12 wk | Yes, venlafaxine | Acupuncture was as effective as venlafaxine. | 1iiC |
[ |
94; 31 (RA); 29 (SA), 34 (usual care) | Weekly for 5 wk | Yes, clonidine, venlafaxine,mirtazapine, HT | 16 patients (52%) in the RA group had significant reduction of hot flashes compared with 7 patients (24%) in the SA groupf. | 1sC |
[ |
120; 30 (EA), 28 (GA); , 32 (SA), 30 (placebo pills) | 8 wk | Yes, HT, SSRIs, SNRIs | EA and SA had significant reduction of hot flashes compared with placebo. | 1sC |
[ |
47; 23 (RA); 24 (SA) | Weekly for 8 wk | Yes, venlafaxine | Compared with baseline, RA significantly improved hot flash severity, frequency, and HFRDI; SA significantly improved HFRDI only. No significant difference between the two groups. | 1sC |
Cancer-related fatigue
Fatigue is a common symptom in patients with cancer and a frequent side effect of chemotherapy and radiation therapy. No effective treatment exists. Several RCTs have been conducted to study the effect of acupuncture in reducing cancer-related fatigue (see Table 6).
One pilot RCT enrolled 47 cancer patients experiencing moderate to severe cancer fatigue and randomly assigned them to one of three groups: acupuncture (N = 15), acupressure (N = 16), or SA (N = 16). Patients in the acupuncture group received six 20-minute acupuncture sessions during a 2-week period; patients in the two acupressure groups were taught to massage RA versus SA points daily for 2 weeks.[
A follow-up RCT (N = 302) by the same group of investigators was published in 2013; among the 246 evaluable patients, acupuncture significantly reduced cancer-related fatigue, anxiety, and depression, and improved QOL when compared with usual care.[
Conversely, two RCTs showed no significant difference between RA and SA in reducing cancer-related fatigue (see Table 6).[
These results showed that acupuncture significantly improved fatigue when compared with usual care alone, although whether it is significantly better than SA will warrant further study.
A 2016 pilot RCT of 78 cancer survivors with cancer-related fatigue showed that infrared laser acupuncture point stimulation was safe in cancer patients. Patients who received infrared laser acupuncture point stimulation on ST36, CV4, and CV6 acupoints 3 times per week for 4 weeks had less fatigue than those who received sham treatment at the end of treatment (3.01 vs. 4.40; P = .002), and the effect lasted to week 8.[
The AIMSS study that was published in 2014 examined the effect of acupuncture on cancer-related fatigue as a secondary end point.[
Reference | Treatment Groups (Enrolled; Treated; Placebo or No Treatment Control)b | Treatment Duration | Concurrent Therapy Used (Yes/No/Unknown)c | Results | Level of Evidence Scored | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BFI = Brief Fatigue Inventory; CI = confidence interval; EA = electroacupuncture; QOL = quality of life; RA = real acupuncture; SA = sham acupuncture; WLC = wait-list control. | ||||||
a For additional information and definition of terms, see the |
||||||
b Number of patients treated plus number of patient controls may not equal number of patients enrolled; number of patients enrolled equals number of patients initially recruited/considered by the researchers who conducted a study; number of patients treated equals number of enrolled patients who were given the treatment being studied AND for whom results were reported. | ||||||
c Concurrent therapy for symptoms treated (not cancer). | ||||||
d Strongest evidence reported that the treatment under study has activity or otherwise improves the well-being of cancer patients. For information about levels of evidence analysis and scores, see Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies. | ||||||
e P< .001, acupuncture versus usual care. | ||||||
f P< .10, education and acupuncture versus usual care. | ||||||
g P = .0095, acupuncture versus WLC group in the improvement of fatigue. | ||||||
h P = .044, acupuncture versus WLC group in the improvement of anxiety. | ||||||
i P = .015, acupuncture versus WLC group in the improvement of depression. | ||||||
j P = .0088, SA versus WLC group in the improvement of fatigue, anxiety, and depression. | ||||||
[ |
47; 15 (acupuncture: six 20-minute sessions during 2 wk), 16 (acupressure: massage acupoints daily); 16 (SA: massage no acupoints daily) | 2 wk | Unknown | Both acupuncture and acupressure significantly reduced cancer fatigue. Acupuncture was a more effective method than acupressure or sham acupressure. | 1sC | |
[ |
302; 227 (acupuncture: once per wk for 6 wk); 75 (usual care) | 6 wk | No | Acupuncture significantly improved fatigue (-3.11; 95% CI, -3.97 to -2.25)e. | 1iiC | |
[ |
13; 6 (education integrated with acupuncture); 7 (usual care) | Improve self-care for 4 wk; acupuncture for 8 wk | No | A 2.38-point decline in fatigue as measured by the BFI when compared with usual care control (90% CI, 0.586–5.014)f. | 1iiC | |
[ |
27; 16 (RA); 11 (SA) | Once to twice per wk during the 6-wk course of radiation therapy | No | Both groups had improvement in fatigue, fatigue distress, QOL, and depression from baseline to wk 10, but no statistically significant intergroup difference. | 1sC | |
[ |
101; 34 (RA); 40 (SA) | Weekly for 6 wk | Unknown | 74 (34 RA; 40 SA control) patients were evaluable. No significant difference of BFI scores between groups. | 1sC | |
[ |
67; 22 (EA), 22 (SA: Steinberg needles); 23 (WLC) | 10 treatments during 8 wk | Unknown | Compared with the WLC, EA improved fatigueg, anxietyh, and depressioni during the 12-wk intervention and follow-up period. In contrast, SA did not reduce fatigue or anxiety symptoms but did improve depression compared with the WLCj. | 1sC | |
[ |
30; 10 (acupuncture), 10 (SA); 10 (WLC) | Six treatments in 8 wk | Unknown | Acupuncture significantly reduced fatigue in 2 wk and improved well-being in 6 wk. | 1sC | |
[ |
78; 39 (laser acupuncture point stimulation); 39 (sham laser acupuncture point stimulation) | Once every other day (3x/wk for 4 wk) for a total of 12 sessions | Unknown | Less fatigue in the treatment group | 1sC |
Xerostomia
A number of clinical studies have investigated the effect of acupuncture for the treatment and prevention of xerostomia in nasopharyngeal carcinoma and head and neck cancer patients.
Acupuncture was associated with a decrease in the onset of symptoms and an increased saliva flow in two randomized studies that compared acupuncture with standard care for preventing xerostomia in patients undergoing radiation therapy.[
Compared with standard care, acupuncture significantly improved xerostomia symptoms in patients who experienced the condition following radiation therapy.[
In 2012, one group published two studies on the effect of acupuncture for preventing xerostomia. The first was a pilot study (N = 23); when compared with SA, RA significantly reduced xerostomia questionnaire scores from week 3 through the 1-month follow-up after radiation therapy. However, they did not find significant difference in salivary flow rates between the groups.[
Another study examined long-term effects of acupuncture on xerostomia.[
One phase III clinical trial with sites in the United States and China randomly assigned 399 patients (339 patients were included in the final analysis) to receive true acupuncture (TA), SA, or standard care control (SCC), with a primary endpoint of xerostomia questionnaire score reduction at 1 year.[
The findings from these studies are summarized in Table 7 below.
Reference | Treatment Groups (Enrolled; Treated; Placebo or No Treatment Control)b | Treatment Duration | Concurrent Therapy Used (Yes/No/ Unknown)c | Results | Level of Evidence Scored | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RA = real acupuncture; SA = sham acupuncture; SCC = standard care control. | |||||||
a For additional information and definition of terms, see the |
|||||||
b Number of patients treated plus number of patient controls may not equal number of patients enrolled; number of patients enrolled equals number of patients initially considered by the researcher who conducted a study; number of patients treated equals number of enrolled patients who were given the treatment being studied AND for whom results were reported. | |||||||
c Concurrent therapy for symptoms treated (not cancer). | |||||||
d Strongest evidence reported that the treatment under study has anticancer activity or otherwise improves the well-being of cancer patients. For information about levels of evidence analysis and scores, see Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies. | |||||||
[ |
399; 132 (RA), 134 (SA); 133 (SCC) | 6–7 wk | Unknown | Decreased xerostomia | 1sC | ||
[ |
86; 40; 46 | 7 wk | No | Symptoms improved and salivary flow increased | 1iiC | ||
[ |
145; 75 (oral care followed by acupuncture), 70 (acupuncture followed by oral care); none | 8 wk | No | Symptoms improved | 1iiC | ||
[ |
23; 11 (acupuncture); 12 (SA) | Unknown | No | Symptoms improved only | 1sC |
Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy
Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common and dose-limiting side effect of neurotoxic chemotherapy. CIPN can manifest as a variety of symptoms, including pain, paresthesia, sensory loss, and muscle weakness, which can lead to poor dexterity and gait disturbance. Because there is limited effective treatment available, the debilitating symptoms of CIPN can cause delay, dose-reduction, or discontinuation of life-saving treatment. Long-term CIPN often significantly impacts patients' functional abilities and QOL. Depending on the agent used and the length of treatment, CIPN can persist long after chemotherapy completion in up to 55% of patients.[
Acupuncture to treat persistent CIPN from taxane or platinum-based chemotherapy
Several studies have investigated the use of acupuncture to alleviate CIPN. Preliminary evidence from two small non–placebo-controlled studies (N = 5 [
A three-arm RCT (N = 90) examined the use of auricular acupuncture for the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain in cancer patients after receiving cancer treatment. The study found a significant reduction in pain at 2 months in patients who were treated with acupuncture compared with patients who received the sham treatment.[
A multicenter observational study of 168 cancer patients who received taxanes or other neuropathy-inducing agents (i.e., bortezomib) compared acupuncture with acupuncture mind-body or control. The study found improvement in CIPN and related symptoms.[
In more recent studies, several RCTs found further promising effects of acupuncture in treating CIPN.
CIPN from bortezomib or thalidomide
Studies evaluating the effects of acupuncture on bortezomib and/or thalidomide -induced peripheral neuropathy have also shown promising results. Two studies of patients with multiple myeloma (N = 27 [
Prevention of CIPN
In a phase IIA trial of acupuncture to prevent progression of CIPN severity from weekly paclitaxel in breast cancer patients, acupuncture prevented progression of CIPN severity in 26 of 27 patients, yielding a significantly lower progression rate compared with historical controls.[
In a sham-controlled trial (N = 63) of 12 weekly true or sham EA for the prevention of CIPN in breast cancer patients receiving taxane, there were no differences in pain or neuropathy between groups at week 12. At week 16, patients receiving real EA were found to have worse pain (higher BPI-SF score) compared with sham.[
Acupuncture for CIPN review
A systematic review and meta-analysis of seven databases through August 2019 examined 386 cancer patients from six randomized controlled trials of high quality, based on the modified Jadad scale.[
Conclusion on the use of acupuncture to treat CIPN
Emerging clinical trials comparing acupuncture with no acupuncture or SA showed promising efficacy for the use of acupuncture to reduce CIPN symptoms. Additional research needs to be done on exploring the mechanism of acupuncture to reduce CIPN symptoms and identify the sensitive population that may benefit most from acupuncture.
Reference | Trial Design | Intervention | Treatment Groups (Enrolled; Treated; Placebo or No Treatment Control) | Measures | Results | Level of Evidence Scorea |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BPI-SF = Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form; CIPN = chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy; CTCAE = Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events; EA = electroacupuncture; EORTC QLQ-C30 = European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire; FACT/GOG-NTX = Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity; FACT-NTX = Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Neurotoxicity subscale; MA = manual acupuncture; NCS = nerve conduction studies; NPS = Neuropathy Pain Scale; NPSI = Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory; NRS = numerical rating scale; PNQ = Patient Neurotoxicity Questionnaire; RCT = randomized controlled trial; SA = sham acupuncture; TCM = traditional Chinese medicine; VAS = visual analog scale. | ||||||
a For information about levels of evidence analysis and scores, see Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies. | ||||||
[ |
RCT | EA/SA/usual care | 75; 27 (RA), 24 (SA); 24 (usual care) | NRS | Significant improvement in NRS-rated pain compared with sham and usual care control | 1iiC |
[ |
RCT | Ear needle at real points/ear needle at placebo points/seeds at placebo points | 90; 29 (acupuncture), 30 (acupuncture at placebo points); 31 (assigned seeds at placebo points) | VAS pain | VAS Pain reduction: 21 (acupuncture)/3 (placebo)/-1 (placebo); Limitations: not specific to CIPN; small sample size; treatment was once per month | 1sC |
[ |
RCT | MA + vitamin B12/vitamin B12 | 98; 49 (acupuncture and methylcobalamin); 49 (methylcobalamin only) | VAS pain, FACT/GOG-NTX, NCS | MA +vitamin B12significantly better than vitamin B12 alone | 1iiC |
[ |
RCT | EA/EA + hydroelectric baths/daily high dose vitamin B1 and B6/placebo | 60; 14 (EA), 14 (hydroelectric baths), 15 (vitamin B1 and B6); 17 (placebo) | NRS | No significant difference among 4 arms; Limitations: low CIPN symptoms at baseline; small sample size | 1iiC |
[ |
RCT | EA | 40; 20 (acupuncture); 20 (usual care) | PNQ sensory score, FACT-NTX, BPI-SF | Significant improvement compared with control | 1iiC |
[ |
Observational | MA | 168; 69 (acupuncture), 67 (acupuncture and mind body therapy); 32 | FACT-Tax | Improvement in CIPN and related symptoms | 2C |
[ |
Single arm | MA | 27; 27; none | FACT/GOG-NTX, NPS | Significant improvement compared with baseline | 2C |
[ |
Single arm | EA | 19; 19; none | FACT/GOG-NTX | Significant improvement compared with baseline | 2C |
[ |
Single arm | MA | 10; 10; none | NPSI, NCS, 4 wk | Significant improvement compared with baseline | 2C |
[ |
Single arm | MA | 33; 15; 14 | VAS, EORTC QLQ-C30, NCI CTCAE | Significant improvement compared with baseline | 1iiC |
[ |
Single arm | MA | 27; 27; none | Progression to grade 3 CIPN, FACT/GOG-NTX | Acupuncture prevented progression to grade 3 CIPN | 2C |
[ |
Case series | Acupuncture/usual care | 47; 21; 26 | CIPN symptoms and NCS | 76% improved symptoms and NCS in acupuncture vs. 15% in control | 3C |
[ |
Case series | TCM acupuncture | 5; 5; none | VAS | CIPN symptoms improved | 3C |
[ |
Case series | Acupuncture/usual care | 11; 6; 5 | NCS | Improvement in NCS: 5/6 (acupuncture), 1/5 (control) | 3C |
Lymphedema
Treatment-induced lymphedema may be a lifelong concern for some breast cancer survivors. There have been a number of case reports, retrospective chart reviews, and pilot studies demonstrating that acupuncture was safe and potentially effective in reducing swelling and improving symptoms in patients with upper- and lower-extremity edema.[
A 2013 single-arm clinical trial (N = 37) evaluated the safety and potential efficacy of acupuncture in treating patients with breast cancer–related lymphedema (BCRL).[
A 2016 RCT of 30 patients showed that warm acupuncture (acupuncture and moxibustion) improved BCRL in 51% of patients compared with 26% of patients treated with oral diosmin in the control group.[
A RCT of acupuncture versus usual care WLC studying 82 BCRL patients did not show a significant difference in arm circumference or bioimpedance.[
Ileus
Four RCTs have studied the effect of acupuncture in reducing the duration of postoperative ileus and have generated conflicting results. In 2010, one study reported the results of an RCT studying the effect of EA compared with usual care and found that EA did not significantly prevent prolonged postoperative ileus.[
In 2012, another study reported the results of a phase II RCT that compared RA with SA (N = 90) for reducing postcolectomy ileus. No significant differences were reported between RA and SA in reducing postcolectomy ileus as measured by the time that the patient first tolerated solid food and the time that the patient first passed flatus or a bowel movement.[
In 2013, a third study reported the results of a three-arm RCT (N = 165) that compared EA with SA and no acupuncture in reducing duration of postoperative ileus after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. EA significantly shortened the time to defecation and the hospital stay compared with SA and no acupuncture.[
A 2017 systematic review and meta-analysis of 10 RCTs involving 776 cancer patients showed that acupuncture was associated with earlier recovery of bowel function (shorter time to first flatus and defecation) compared with the control (no acupuncture, or SA or other types of active treatments).[
A 2023 multicenter, sham-controlled RCT conducted in China compared EA with SA in patients who underwent laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer (N = 249). The study reported that the median time to first defecation (primary endpoint) was significantly shorter in the EA group compared with the SA group (P = .003).[
Anxiety
An RCT compared preoperative acupuncture, intraoperative acupuncture, and the combination of both with conventional care for alleviating anxiety in patients undergoing surgery.[
An RCT showed that acupressure at LI4 and HT7 reduced pain and anxiety levels in patients undergoing bone marrow biopsy.[
Several studies have assessed improved anxiety as a secondary endpoint. An RCT that published in 2013 examined cancer-related fatigue in 246 patients. Patients reported that acupuncture significantly reduced fatigue, anxiety, and depression, and improved QOL when compared with usual care.[
A post hoc analysis of a larger study showed that acupressure was associated with reduced anxiety, pain, and depressive symptoms when compared with usual care.[
Sleep
Several RCTs have studied the effect of acupuncture in improving depression and sleep quality in cancer patients. In 2011, one study (N = 80) reported that acupuncture significantly improved depression and sleep quality when compared with fluoxetine. Patients receiving acupuncture reported significantly greater reductions in scores on the Self-rating Depression Scale, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index.[
A 2019 RCT of cancer survivors reported that even though both cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) and acupuncture produced a clinically significant reduction in insomnia severity, CBT-I is superior to acupuncture. Subgroup analyses showed that acupuncture was more effective than CBT-I in pain reduction, and CBT-I was more effective for improving insomnia in highly educated White males with no pain at baseline.[
The effect of acupuncture on sleep has been studied as one of the secondary endpoints in an AIMSS study published in 2014.[
Other treatment-related side effects
Many studies have reported on the effects of acupuncture on cancer or other cancer treatment–related symptoms, including weight loss, cough, hemoptysis, fever, anxiety, depression, proctitis, dysphonia, esophageal obstruction, cancer-related cognitive impairment,[
Reference | Trial Design | Treatment Groups (Enrolled; Treated; Placebo or No Treatment Control)b | Treatment Duration | Concurrent Therapy Used(Yes/No/ Unknown)c | Results | Level of Evidence Scored | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AVLT = auditory-verbal learning test; CBT-I = cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia; CDT = clock-drawing test; EA = electroacupuncture; FACT-COG = functional assessment of cancer treatmentcognitiontest; RA = real acupuncture; RCT = randomized controlled trial; SA = sham acupuncture; WLC = wait-list control. | |||||||
a For additional information and definition of terms, see the |
|||||||
b Number of patients treated plus number of patient controls may not equal number of patients enrolled; number of patients enrolled equals number of patients initially considered by the researcher who conducted a study; number of patients treated equals number of enrolled patients who were given the treatment being studied AND for whom results were reported. | |||||||
c Concurrent therapy for symptoms treated (not cancer). | |||||||
d Strongest evidence reported that the treatment under study has anticancer activity or otherwise improves the well-being of cancer patients. For information about levels of evidence analysis and scores, see Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies. | |||||||
e P< .001, acupuncture versus usual care. | |||||||
Cognitive Impairment | |||||||
[ |
RCT | 80; 40; 40 | 5x/wk for two 4-wk courses | Unknown | Treatment group had significantly higher scores on FACT-COG, AVLT3, and CDT compared with baseline | 1iiC | |
[ |
RCT | 93; 46; 47 | 2x/wk for 8-wk course | No | No difference in primary end point: Montreal cognitive assessment, treatment group had significantly better reverse digit span test compared with control (one of the secondary endpoints) | 1iiC | |
[ |
RCT | 99; 52 (acupuncture), 47 (cognitive behavior therapy; none | 10 treatments for 8-wk course | No | Both groups had significant improvement compared with baseline; no between-group differences | 1iiC | |
Lymphedema and Related Symptoms | |||||||
[ |
RCT | 30; 15 ( warm acupuncture at 6 acupoints); 15 (control group received 900 mg diosmin tablets) | Acupuncture, 30 min on alternate days for 30 d; diosmin 3x/day for 30 d | Unknown | Significant reduction in upper arm lymphedema compared with diosmin | 1iiC | |
[ |
RCT | 82; 40 (RA); 42 (WLC) | 2x/wk for 6 wk | Yes, massage,compressiongarments, exercise, or wraps | No significant difference between groups for arm circumference difference or bioimpedance difference | 1iiC | |
[ |
Nonconsecutive case series | 24; 24 (acupuncture andmoxibustion); none | 5x/wk during hospitalization and 2x/wk atoutpatientclinic | Unknown | Edema prevented or markedly reduced | 3iiiC | |
[ |
Nonconsecutive case series | 35; 30 (acupuncture and moxibustion); none | 2 wk with 4- and 12-wk follow-up | Unknown | Symptoms improved | 3iiiC | |
Ileus | |||||||
[ |
RCT | 85; 44; 41 | Postoperative d 1 up to 6 d | No | EA did not significantly prevent prolonged postoperative ileus | 1iiC | |
[ |
RCT | 90;46 (RA), 44 (SA); none | 3 d postoperative | Unknown | No significant differences were reported | 1sC | |
[ |
RCT | 165; 55 (EA), 55 (SA); 55 | 4 d postoperative | Unknown | EA significantly shortened the time to defecation and hospital stay compared with SA and no acupuncture | 1sC | |
[ |
RCT | 249; 125 (EA), 124 (SA); none | 4 d postoperative | Unknown | Prolonged postoperative ileus occurred in 10% of the EA group compared with 20% in the SA group | 1sC | |
Opioid-Induced Constipation | |||||||
[ |
RCT | 200; 100; 100 | 8 min treatment, 1x/d for 4 wk | Yes | Acupressure group had a decrease in constipation | 1iiC | |
Anxiety | |||||||
[ |
RCT | 144; 36 (preoperative acupuncture), 35 (intraoperative acupuncture), 36 (combined techniques); 34 | 30 min | Unknown | Preoperative acupuncture alleviated anxiety in the preoperative waiting area | 1iiC | |
[ |
RCT | 90; 30 (acupressure at LI4), 30 (acupressure at HT7); 30 (sham acupressure) | 2 min after the start and end of biopsy | Yes, lidocaine | Reduced anxiety and pain in treatment group | 1sC | |
[ |
RCT | 302; 227 (acupuncture: once a wk for 6 wk); 75 (usual care) | 6 wk | No | Acupuncture significantly reduced fatigue, anxiety, and depression, and improved QOL when compared with usual caree | 1iiC | |
[ |
RCT | 249; 67; 22 (EA), 22 (SA: Steinberg needles); 23 (WLC) | 10 treatments during 8 wk | Unknown | When acupuncture was compared with WLCs, EA significantly improved fatigue, anxiety, and depression; SA did not improve fatigue or anxiety but improved depression | 1sC | |
Sleep Disturbances | |||||||
[ |
RCT | 67; 22 (EA), 22 (SA: Steinberg needles); 23 (WLC) | 10 treatments during 8 wk | Unknown | As a secondary endpoint, EA participants had a nonsignificant improvement in sleep disturbance | 1sC | |
[ |
RCT | 80; 40; 40 | 30 d | Unknown | Acupuncture significantly improved depression and sleep quality compared with fluoxetine | 1sC | |
[ |
RCT | 160; 80; 80 | 8 wk | Yes | Both CBT-I and acupuncture produced a clinically significant reduction in insomnia severity, with CBT-I superior to acupuncture | 1iiC | |
[ |
RCT | 70; 35; 35 | 8 wk | Unknown | A secondary analysis reported acupuncture reduced pain more significantly than CBT-I at week 8 in patients with both insomnia and pain | 1iiC | |
Fatigue | |||||||
[ |
RCT | 47; 15 (acupuncture), 16 (acupressure); 16 (SA) | 4 wk | No | Improved fatigue levels | 1sC | |
Radiation Proctitis | |||||||
[ |
Nonconsecutive case series | 44; 44; none | Unknown | No | Radiation proctitis resolved in 73% of patients: nobloodormucusfor 15 days | 3iiiC | |
Hiccups | |||||||
[ |
Retrospective case series | 16; 16; none | 1–7 d | Unknown | Symptom relief | 3iiiC | |
Multiple Symptoms | |||||||
[ |
Nonconsecutive case series, surveyed retrospectively | 79; 79 (traditional Chinese acupuncture, auricular acupuncture,percutaneousnerve stimulation, Korean hand acupuncture, or Japanese scalp acupuncture); none | Unknown | Yes,standard medical therapies | 60% showed at least 30% improvement | 3iiiC |
In an RCT,[
A retrospective study involved patients at an oncology clinic who were offered acupuncture treatment for potential palliation of symptoms.[
Pediatric Population and Acupuncture
Few studies have examined the effects of acupuncture on pediatric patients with cancer. In a survey study of 80 patients, the acceptance rate for acupuncture was 82% in pediatric, adolescent, and young adult patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplant.[
Adverse effects of acupuncture in children appear to be rare and limited to the same effects that are observed in adults.[
Reference | Trial Design | Treatment Groups (Enrolled; Treated; Placebo or No Treatment Control)b | Treatment Duration | Concurrent Therapy Used (Yes/No/ Unknown)c | Results | Level of Evidence Scored |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RCT = randomized controlled trial. | ||||||
a For additional information and definition of terms, see the |
||||||
b Number of patients treated plus number of patient controls may not equal number of patients enrolled; number of patients enrolled equals number of patients initially recruited/considered by the researchers who conducted a study; number of patients treated equals number of enrolled patients who were given the treatment being studied AND for whom results were reported. | ||||||
c Concurrent therapy for symptoms treated (not cancer). | ||||||
d Strongest evidence reported that the treatment under study has activity or otherwise improves the well-being of cancer patients. For information about levels of evidence analysis and scores, see Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies. | ||||||
[ |
RCT | 165; 83 (real acupressure bands); 82 (sham bands) | Up to 7 d after chemotherapy | Yes, antiemetics | No significant differences noted between study groups | 1sC |
Current Clinical Trials
Use our
References:
Serious adverse effects of acupuncture are rare. Reported accidents and infections appear to be related to violations of sterile procedure, negligence of the practitioner, or both.[
Minor adverse effects of acupuncture such as the following, have been reported:
These minor adverse effects can be minimized by appropriate patient management, including local pressing and massage at the needling site after treatment.[
References:
To assist readers in evaluating the results of human studies of integrative, alternative, and complementary therapies for cancer, the strength of the evidence (i.e., the levels of evidence) associated with each type of treatment is provided whenever possible. To qualify for a level of evidence analysis, a study must:
Separate levels of evidence scores are assigned to qualifying human studies on the basis of statistical strength of the study design and scientific strength of the treatment outcomes (i.e., endpoints) measured. The resulting two scores are then combined to produce an overall score. For an explanation of the scores and additional information about levels of evidence analysis, see the Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies.
It is noteworthy that almost all reported clinical studies on the effects of acupuncture on cancer or cancer therapy –related symptoms focus on symptom management rather than the disease itself. Investigations into the effects of acupuncture on chemotherapy -induced nausea and vomiting, many of which were randomized and well-controlled, produced the most convincing findings. A number of randomized controlled trials have reported on the effect of acupuncture in alleviating other cancer treatment-associated side effects, with many showing promising evidence supporting the use of acupuncture. Additional phase III clinical trials are ongoing.
The PDQ cancer information summaries are reviewed regularly and updated as new information becomes available. This section describes the latest changes made to this summary as of the date above.
Human/Clinical Studies
Revised text to state that many studies have reported on the effects of acupuncture on cancer or other cancer treatment–related symptoms, including weight loss, cough, hemoptysis, fever, anxiety, depression, proctitis, dysphonia, esophageal obstruction, cancer-related cognitive impairment, opioid-induced constipation, and hiccups. These studies were from China, Japan, Turkey, Sweden, and the United States (cited Yildirim et al. as reference 134).
Revised Table 9 to include Yildirim et al. in the clinical studies of acupuncture for opioid-induced constipation.
This summary is written and maintained by the
Purpose of This Summary
This PDQ cancer information summary for health professionals provides comprehensive, peer-reviewed, evidence-based information about the use of acupuncture in the treatment of people with cancer. It is intended as a resource to inform and assist clinicians in the care of their patients. It does not provide formal guidelines or recommendations for making health care decisions.
Reviewers and Updates
This summary is reviewed regularly and updated as necessary by the
Board members review recently published articles each month to determine whether an article should:
Changes to the summaries are made through a consensus process in which Board members evaluate the strength of the evidence in the published articles and determine how the article should be included in the summary.
Any comments or questions about the summary content should be submitted to Cancer.gov through the NCI website's
Levels of Evidence
Some of the reference citations in this summary are accompanied by a level-of-evidence designation. These designations are intended to help readers assess the strength of the evidence supporting the use of specific interventions or approaches. The PDQ Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies Editorial Board uses a formal evidence ranking system in developing its level-of-evidence designations.
Permission to Use This Summary
PDQ is a registered trademark. Although the content of PDQ documents can be used freely as text, it cannot be identified as an NCI PDQ cancer information summary unless it is presented in its entirety and is regularly updated. However, an author would be permitted to write a sentence such as "NCI's PDQ cancer information summary about breast cancer prevention states the risks succinctly: [include excerpt from the summary]."
The preferred citation for this PDQ summary is:
PDQ® Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies Editorial Board. PDQ Acupuncture. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. Updated <MM/DD/YYYY>. Available at:
Images in this summary are used with permission of the author(s), artist, and/or publisher for use within the PDQ summaries only. Permission to use images outside the context of PDQ information must be obtained from the owner(s) and cannot be granted by the National Cancer Institute. Information about using the illustrations in this summary, along with many other cancer-related images, is available in
Disclaimer
The information in these summaries should not be used as a basis for insurance reimbursement determinations. More information on insurance coverage is available on Cancer.gov on the
Contact Us
More information about contacting us or receiving help with the Cancer.gov website can be found on our
Last Revised: 2024-01-25
This information does not replace the advice of a doctor. Ignite Healthwise, LLC, disclaims any warranty or liability for your use of this information. Your use of this information means that you agree to the
Healthwise, Healthwise for every health decision, and the Healthwise logo are trademarks of Ignite Healthwise, LLC.
Individual and family medical and dental insurance plans are insured by Cigna Health and Life Insurance Company (CHLIC), Cigna HealthCare of Arizona, Inc., Cigna HealthCare of Illinois, Inc., Cigna HealthCare of Georgia, Inc., Cigna HealthCare of North Carolina, Inc., Cigna HealthCare of South Carolina, Inc., and Cigna HealthCare of Texas, Inc. Group health insurance and health benefit plans are insured or administered by CHLIC, Connecticut General Life Insurance Company (CGLIC), or their affiliates (see
All insurance policies and group benefit plans contain exclusions and limitations. For availability, costs and complete details of coverage, contact a licensed agent or Cigna sales representative. This website is not intended for residents of New Mexico.