OBJECTIVE: To pilot an investigation of individualized homeopathy for symptoms of estrogen withdrawal in breast cancer survivors. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING:Outpatient department of a National Health Service (NHS) homeopathic hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-seven (57) women met inclusion criteria and 53 were randomized to the study. INTERVENTION: After 2 weeks of baseline assessment, all participants received a consultation plus either oral homeopathic medicine or placebo, assessed every 4 weeks for 16 weeks. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were the activity score and profile score of the Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP). RESULTS:Eighty-five percent (85%) (45/53) of women completed the study. There was no evidence of a difference seen between groups for either activity (adjusted difference =-0.4, 95% confidence interval CI -1.0 to 0.2, p = 0.17) or profile scores (adjusted difference = -0.4, 95% CI -0.9 to 0.1, p = 0.13) using this trial design, although post hoc power calculations suggests that 65-175 would be needed per group to detect differences of this magnitude with sufficient precision. Clinically relevant improvements in symptoms and mood disturbance were seen for both groups over the study period. CONCLUSION: Improvements were seen for symptom scores over the study period. However, presuming these improvements were caused by the individualized homeopathic approach, the study failed to show clearly that the specific effect of the remedy added further to the nonspecific effects of the consultation. Future trial design must ensure adequate power to account for the nonspecific impact of such complex individualized interventions while pragmatic designs may more readily answer questions of clinical and cost effectiveness.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To pilot an investigation of individualized homeopathy for symptoms of estrogen withdrawal in breast cancer survivors. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING:Outpatient department of a National Health Service (NHS) homeopathic hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-seven (57) women met inclusion criteria and 53 were randomized to the study. INTERVENTION: After 2 weeks of baseline assessment, all participants received a consultation plus either oral homeopathic medicine or placebo, assessed every 4 weeks for 16 weeks. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were the activity score and profile score of the Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP). RESULTS: Eighty-five percent (85%) (45/53) of women completed the study. There was no evidence of a difference seen between groups for either activity (adjusted difference =-0.4, 95% confidence interval CI -1.0 to 0.2, p = 0.17) or profile scores (adjusted difference = -0.4, 95% CI -0.9 to 0.1, p = 0.13) using this trial design, although post hoc power calculations suggests that 65-175 would be needed per group to detect differences of this magnitude with sufficient precision. Clinically relevant improvements in symptoms and mood disturbance were seen for both groups over the study period. CONCLUSION: Improvements were seen for symptom scores over the study period. However, presuming these improvements were caused by the individualized homeopathic approach, the study failed to show clearly that the specific effect of the remedy added further to the nonspecific effects of the consultation. Future trial design must ensure adequate power to account for the nonspecific impact of such complex individualized interventions while pragmatic designs may more readily answer questions of clinical and cost effectiveness.
Authors: Vanessa B Sheppard; Suzanne C O'Neill; Asma Dilawari; Sara Horton; Fikru A Hirpa; Claudine Isaacs Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2014-12-01 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Anna Wagenknecht; Jennifer Dörfler; Maren Freuding; Lena Josfeld; Jutta Huebner Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2022-06-22 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Heather Greenlee; Melissa J DuPont-Reyes; Lynda G Balneaves; Linda E Carlson; Misha R Cohen; Gary Deng; Jillian A Johnson; Matthew Mumber; Dugald Seely; Suzanna M Zick; Lindsay M Boyce; Debu Tripathy Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2017-04-24 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Vincent C H Chung; Vivian C W Wong; Chun Hong Lau; Henny Hui; Tat Hing Lam; Lin Xiao Zhong; Samuel Y S Wong; Sian M Griffiths Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2010-09-30 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: William I Fisher; Aimee K Johnson; Gary R Elkins; Julie L Otte; Debra S Burns; Menggang Yu; Janet S Carpenter Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2013-01-25 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Matthias Rostock; Johannes Naumann; Corina Guethlin; Lars Guenther; Hans H Bartsch; Harald Walach Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2011-01-17 Impact factor: 4.430