Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 644

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Management of Cancer Cachexia: ASCO Guideline

Open access
Roeland, Eric J., Bohlke, Kari, Baracos, Vickie E., Bruera, Eduardo, del Fabbro, Egidio, Dixon, Suzanne, Fallon, Marie, Herrstedt, Jørn, Lau, Harold, Platek, Mary, Rugo, Hope S., Schnipper, Hester H., Smith, Thomas J., Tan, Winston, Loprinzi, Charles L.·2020·Journal of Clinical Oncology
DOI 10.1200/jco.20.00611
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based guidance on the clinical management of cancer cachexia in adult patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature collected evidence regarding nutritional, pharmacologic, and other interventions, such as exercise, for cancer cachexia. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews of RCTs published from 1966 through October 17, 2019. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. RESULTS: The review included 20 systematic reviews and 13 additional RCTs. Dietary counseling, with or without oral nutritional supplements, was reported to increase body weight in some trials, but evidence remains limited. Pharmacologic interventions associated with improvements in appetite and/or body weight include progesterone analogs and corticosteroids. The other evaluated interventions either had no benefit or insufficient evidence of benefit to draw conclusions on efficacy. Limitations of the evidence include high drop-out rates, consistent with advanced cancer, as well as variability across studies in outcomes of interest and methods for outcome assessment. RECOMMENDATIONS: Dietary counseling may be offered with the goals of providing patients and caregivers with advice for the management of cachexia. Enteral feeding tubes and parenteral nutrition should not be used routinely. In the absence of more robust evidence, no specific pharmacological intervention can be recommended as the standard of care; therefore, clinicians may choose not to prescribe medications specifically for the treatment of cancer cachexia. Nonetheless, when it is decided to trial a drug to improve appetite and/or improve weight gain, currently available pharmacologic interventions that may be used include progesterone analogs and short-term (weeks) corticosteroids.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.20.00611

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 12 references

Cited by

See all 644

Metadata

Authors
Roeland, E. J., Bohlke, K., Baracos, V. E., Bruera, E., del Fabbro, E., Dixon, S., Fallon, M., Herrstedt, J., Lau, H., Platek, M., Rugo, H. S., Schnipper, H. H., Smith, T. J., Tan, W., & Loprinzi, C. L.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Publisher
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Published
2020-07-20
Volume
38
Issue
21
Pages
2438-2453
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
DOI
10.1200/jco.20.00611
OpenAlex
W3028453792
Cited by
644
References
12
FWCI
37.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Management of Cancer Cachexia: ASCO Guideline. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.20.00611
The paper
Roeland, E. J., Bohlke, K., Baracos, V. E., Bruera, E., del Fabbro, E., Dixon, S., Fallon, M., Herrstedt, J., Lau, H., Platek, M., Rugo, H. S., Schnipper, H. H., Smith, T. J., Tan, W., & Loprinzi, C. L. (2020). Management of Cancer Cachexia: ASCO Guideline. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.20.00611

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.