Accessibility Tools

Skip to main content

Research Highlights: March 2026

Compiled by the SIO Research Committee  ·  March 12, 2026

Each month, the SIO Research Committee reviews recently published integrative oncology literature and shares highlights with the broader membership.

TCM Granules Added to Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Lung Cancer

Study type: Extended follow-up (116 months) of a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled RCT in resected stage IB–IIIA NSCLC. Primary endpoint was QoL (reported 2017); survival was secondary¹

Key results

  • A positive DFS trend favored TCM granules, reaching significance only in the stage IB subgroup (p = 0.02); results were non-significant across other stages.
  • No harm signal: TCM did not reduce survival in any subgroup. Median OS was not reached in either arm.

Strengths & caveats

  • Strength: Long observation window (~10 years) with balanced treatment arms.
  • Caveat: Not powered for survival; the significant finding is a subgroup analysis only.
  • Caveat: Standardized TCM preparation does not reflect individualized traditional practice.

Bottom line: Encouraging safety and trend signal; a survival-powered prospective trial is needed before clinical conclusions can be drawn.

Mandala Art Therapy for Symptom Management in Pediatric Oncology

Study type: Single-center RCT (Turkey, 2024). Children and youth aged 9–17 receiving outpatient chemotherapy. Intervention (n = 30) vs. standard care (n = 31)²

Key results

  • Significant within-group reductions in nausea, vomiting, pain, and anxiety in the mandala art therapy arm (p < 0.01); no change in controls.
  • Instruments: Nausea-Vomiting Thermometer, Wong-Baker Faces Pain Scale, STAIC.

Strengths & caveats

  • Strength: Addresses a data-sparse population – pediatric RCT evidence for mind-body interventions is scarce.
  • Caveat: Single-center; within-group analysis only – between-group comparisons were not reported, which is the expected analytic approach for an RCT.
  • Caveat: Age range 9–17 spans divergent developmental stages; cultural context (Turkey) merits consideration for generalizability.

Bottom line: Promising proof-of-concept. Multi-center trials with proper between-group analyses are needed before clinical recommendations.

Music Therapy vs. CBT via Telehealth for Anxiety in Cancer Survivors

Study type: Two-arm, parallel-group non-inferiority RCT (MELODY trial). 300 adult cancer survivors with elevated anxiety randomized to 7 weekly telehealth sessions of music therapy or CBT. Published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2026.³

Key results

  • Music therapy was noninferior to CBT for anxiety reduction at both week 8 and week 26 (HADS-A; non-inferiority margin 1.30; p < 0.001).
  • Both arms exceeded the MCID of 1.7 points; improvements were durable at 6-month follow-up.
  • Secondary gains (fatigue, depression, insomnia, pain, cognitive function, QoL) were similar across arms.

Strengths & caveats

  • Strength: Rigorous head-to-head design; diverse sample (English- and Spanish-speaking); standardized telehealth delivery.
  • Strength: JCO publication signals growing mainstream recognition of IO research.
  • Caveat: No usual-care control group; no formal psychiatric diagnostic assessment at enrollment.

Bottom line: High-quality, practice-informing evidence. Music therapy should be considered alongside CBT to expand access to evidence-based anxiety treatment in survivorship.

In Focus: JAMA Network Open CAM & Breast Cancer Survival – A Critical Appraisal

Study type: Retrospective cohort study. National Cancer Database; 2,157,219 women with breast cancer (2011–2021). Published JAMA Network Open, March 2, 2026.⁴

Key results

  • Four groups: traditional therapy only, traditional + CAM, CAM alone, no treatment. CAM-alone survival closely mirrored the no-treatment curve (aHR 3.67 vs. traditional therapy).
  • Media widely misrepresented findings – headline: “CAM increases risk of dying by 400%.”

Strengths & caveats

  • Strength: Large, population-level dataset spanning all breast cancer stages.
  • Caveat: The “CAM alone” group represents patients who forewent conventional treatment – not integrative oncology. The study does not evaluate IO.
  • Caveat: CAM-alone and CAM + traditional groups each comprised <0.1% of the cohort – far below documented real-world prevalence of >50%. This reflects data capture failure, not true utilization.
  • Caveat: CAM is undefined and undifferentiated; acupuncture and harmful supplements are conflated. The survival signal reflects the danger of forgoing conventional care.

Bottom line: This study does not show that integrative oncology harms patients. The committee is submitting a formal comment to JAMA Network Open. Members are encouraged to use this summary when addressing patient or media inquiries.

A Note on Our Review Process

The SIO Research Committee reviews articles collectively before amplifying them to the membership and public. We aim to share work that is methodologically sound and clinically meaningful – and to provide honest context when promising findings require further validation. We welcome article nominations from members for future monthly reviews.

References

1. Wang Y, Jiao L, Chen Z, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy with traditional Chinese herbal granules vs. placebo in resected NSCLC: updated survival analysis. Integr Cancer Ther. 2026;25:15347354251409081. doi:10.1177/15347354251409081

2. Yürük E, Todil T, Aşkan F, et al. Effects of mandala art therapy (coloring) on nausea, vomiting, pain and anxiety in children and youth receiving outpatient chemotherapy. J Pediatr Nurs. 2025. doi:10.1016/j.pedn.2025.11.006

3. Liou KT, Bradt J, Currier MB, et al. Music therapy versus cognitive behavioral therapy via telehealth for anxiety in survivors of cancer: a randomized clinical trial. J Clin Oncol. 2026. doi:10.1200/JCO-25-00726

4. Ayoade OF, Caturegli G, Canavan ME, Resio BJ, Berger ER, Boffa DJ. Use of complementary and alternative medicine in the management of breast cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2026;9(3):e260337. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.0337