Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of fan therapy for the relief of dyspnea in patients with chronic progressive disease. Methods: A systematic electronic database search of all available articles published before October 23, 2019 was conducted using Ichushi-Web of the Japan Medical Abstract Society databases, CENTRAL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE. In addition, a hand-search for updates was performed using PubMed on June 30, 2020 and December 7, 2021. The inclusion criteria were: 1) any RCTs comparing the effect of fan therapy with any other intervention, and 2) patients aged ≥18 years. Exclusion criteria were: 1) duplicate references, and 2) conference presentations. Results: We identified 110 studies, of which 10 met our criteria for inclusion. Finally, five studies were used in the meta-analysis. Fan therapy significantly improved dyspnea in patients with chronic progressive disease compared to control groups with a standardized mean difference of −1.43 (95% confidence interval: −2.70 to −0.17, I2=94%, p<0.0001). Conclusion: Fan therapy was found to be effective in reducing dyspnea in chronic progressive disease.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen (HFNC) for dyspnea in patients with advanced disease. Methods: A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Ichu-shi Web. Inclusion criteria were: 1) randomized controlled trials evaluating the effect of HFNC on dyspnea; 2) aged 18 years or older with advanced disease with hypoxemia; 3) control group was conventional oxygen therapy or noninvasive positive pressure ventilation. Exclusion criteria were: 1) patients in intensive care unit, 2) weaning from ventilator. Results: Six studies (4 from database searches, and 2 from hand searches) were included. In the 2 studies evaluating short-term intervention, one showed HFNC was more efficacious, and the other conventional oxygen was more efficacious. In the 2 studies evaluating long-term interventions: one showed HFNC was more efficacious, and the other showed no significant difference. In the 2 studies evaluating the intervention during exercise, one showed HFNC was more efficacious, and the other showed no significant difference. Conclusion: HFNC may be effective for dyspnea in patients with advanced disease associated with hypoxemia.

Objective: Almost half of all patients with cancer experience dyspnea, which can have various causes. Although systemic corticosteroids are administered to relieve symptoms, their efficacy has not been established. This systematic review aims to determine the efficacy of systemic corticosteroids for dyspnea in patients with cancer. Methods: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Ichushi-Web databases were searched for articles published from their inception to September 23, 2019, on studies of systemic corticosteroid administration for dyspnea in patients with cancer. The primary outcome measure was dyspnea intensity, as assessed by patient-reported outcomes. Secondary outcome measures were quality of life, delirium, and severe adverse events. Results: Two RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. With regard to alleviating dyspnea, the systematic corticosteroid group was associated with significantly greater dyspnea relief than the placebo group (mean difference: −0.71 [95% CI: −1.4 to −0.03]). However, a meta-analysis of quality of life and delirium could not be performed due to insufficient data. Analysis of severe adverse events showed no significant difference in their incidence between the corticosteroid and control groups (relative rate: 0.96 [95% CI: 0.19-4.93]). Conclusions: Systemic corticosteroids may be effective in treating dyspnea in patients with cancer, particularly those with lung involvement. Limiting the conditions for which corticosteroids are approved is expected to promote their appropriate use and minimize their adverse effects. However, further investigation is needed to determine the appropriate dosage, and the conditions in which corticosteroids are effective.