Richard E. Harris, Eric Ichesco, Chelsea Cummiford, Johnson P. Hampson, Thomas L. Chenevert, Neil Basu, Suzanna M. Zick
Abstract
Persistent fatigue is a pernicious symptom in many cancer survivors. Existing treatments are limited or ineffective and often lack any underlying biologic rationale. Acupressure is emerging as a promising new intervention for persistent cancer-related fatigue; however, the underlying mechanisms of action are unknown. Our previous investigations suggested that fatigued breast cancer survivors have alterations in brain neurochemistry within the posterior insula and disturbed functional connectivity to the default mode network (DMN), as compared to non-fatigued breast cancer survivors. Here, we investigated if insula and DMN connectivity were modulated by self-administered acupressure by randomizing breast cancer survivors (n = 19) to two distinct treatments: relaxing acupressure or stimulating acupressure. All participants underwent proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the posterior insula and functional connectivity magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and immediately following 6 weeks of acupressure self-treatment. As compared to baseline measures, relaxing acupressure decreased posterior insula to dorsolateral prefrontal cortex connectivity, whereas stimulating acupressure enhanced this connectivity (p < 0.05 corrected). For relaxing but not stimulating acupressure, reduced connectivity was associated with sleep improvement. In addition, connectivity of the DMN to the superior colliculus was increased with relaxing acupressure and decreased with stimulating acupressure, whereas DMN connectivity to the bilateral pulvinar was increased with stimulating and decreased with relaxing acupressure (p < 0.05 corrected). These data suggest that self-administered acupressure at different acupoints has specificity in relation to their mechanisms of action in fatigued breast cancer survivors.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 January 2019.
All research outputs
#1,662,591
of 23,301,510 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#636
of 12,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,650
of 317,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#18
of 189 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,301,510 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,206 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,116 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 189 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
