Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: The latest systematic review on the prevalence of pain in cancer survivors was published 5 years ago. The current review aims to provide an extended overview on the prevalence of pain, pain mechanisms, pain characteristics, and assessment methods in cancer survivors.
METHODS: A systematic research was conducted on 17th of April 2020 using MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane looking at studies from 2014 to 2020. Studies had to report pain prevalence rates in cancer survivors with a solid tumor who finished curative treatment at least 3 months ago. Methodological quality was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Joanna Briggs Institute quality appraisal tool. Characteristics of the included studies, participants and reported pain prevalence rates were extracted. The reported prevalence rates of the individual studies were pooled within a meta-analysis. Meta-regressions were performed to identify possible determinants of the pooled pain prevalence.
RESULTS: After deduplication, 7300 articles were screened, after which 38 were included in the meta-analysis. Risk of bias was rated low in 26 articles and moderate in 12 articles. The pooled pain prevalence was 47% (95%CI 39-55), with a heterogeneity of 98.99%.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that nearly half of cancer survivors report pain after completing curative treatment at least 3 months ago. However, substantial unexplained heterogeneity warrants cautious interpretation of these results. Meta-regression using cancer type, treatment location, pain measurement, and follow-up time as a covariate could not explain influencing factors explaining the high heterogeneity.
METHODS: A systematic research was conducted on 17th of April 2020 using MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane looking at studies from 2014 to 2020. Studies had to report pain prevalence rates in cancer survivors with a solid tumor who finished curative treatment at least 3 months ago. Methodological quality was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Joanna Briggs Institute quality appraisal tool. Characteristics of the included studies, participants and reported pain prevalence rates were extracted. The reported prevalence rates of the individual studies were pooled within a meta-analysis. Meta-regressions were performed to identify possible determinants of the pooled pain prevalence.
RESULTS: After deduplication, 7300 articles were screened, after which 38 were included in the meta-analysis. Risk of bias was rated low in 26 articles and moderate in 12 articles. The pooled pain prevalence was 47% (95%CI 39-55), with a heterogeneity of 98.99%.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that nearly half of cancer survivors report pain after completing curative treatment at least 3 months ago. However, substantial unexplained heterogeneity warrants cautious interpretation of these results. Meta-regression using cancer type, treatment location, pain measurement, and follow-up time as a covariate could not explain influencing factors explaining the high heterogeneity.
摘要：
目的：关于癌症幸存者疼痛患病率的最新系统综述发表于5年前。当前的审查旨在提供对疼痛患病率的扩展概述，疼痛机制,疼痛的特点，以及癌症幸存者的评估方法。
方法：于2020年4月17日使用MEDLINE进行了系统研究，Embase,Scopus,WebofScience,和Cochrane从2014年到2020年的研究。研究必须报告至少3个月前完成治疗的患有实体瘤的癌症幸存者的疼痛患病率。方法质量由两名独立审稿人使用JoannaBriggs研究所质量评估工具进行评估。纳入研究的特点，抽取参与者和报告的疼痛患病率.在荟萃分析中汇总了各个研究的报告患病率。进行Meta回归以确定合并疼痛患病率的可能决定因素。
结果：重复数据删除后，筛选了7300篇文章，之后,38项纳入荟萃分析.在26篇文章中，偏倚风险被评为低，在12篇文章中被评为中等。合并疼痛患病率为47%（95CI39-55），异质性为98.99%。
结论：这项荟萃分析表明，将近一半的癌症幸存者在至少3个月前完成治疗后报告疼痛。然而,大量无法解释的异质性需要对这些结果进行谨慎的解释。使用癌症类型的Meta回归，治疗地点,疼痛测量，随访时间作为协变量无法解释解释高度异质性的影响因素。
方法：于2020年4月17日使用MEDLINE进行了系统研究，Embase,Scopus,WebofScience,和Cochrane从2014年到2020年的研究。研究必须报告至少3个月前完成治疗的患有实体瘤的癌症幸存者的疼痛患病率。方法质量由两名独立审稿人使用JoannaBriggs研究所质量评估工具进行评估。纳入研究的特点，抽取参与者和报告的疼痛患病率.在荟萃分析中汇总了各个研究的报告患病率。进行Meta回归以确定合并疼痛患病率的可能决定因素。
结果：重复数据删除后，筛选了7300篇文章，之后,38项纳入荟萃分析.在26篇文章中，偏倚风险被评为低，在12篇文章中被评为中等。合并疼痛患病率为47%（95CI39-55），异质性为98.99%。
结论：这项荟萃分析表明，将近一半的癌症幸存者在至少3个月前完成治疗后报告疼痛。然而,大量无法解释的异质性需要对这些结果进行谨慎的解释。使用癌症类型的Meta回归，治疗地点,疼痛测量，随访时间作为协变量无法解释解释高度异质性的影响因素。
