C A Buckner1,2, R M Lafrenie1,2, J A Dénommée2, J M Caswell1, D A Want3. 1. Health Sciences North Research Institute. 2. Departments of Biology, Biomolecular Sciences, and Psychology, Laurentian University, and. 3. Northeast Cancer Centre, Sudbury, ON.
Abstract
Background: Cancer patients are increasingly seeking out complementary and alternative medicine (cam) and might be reluctant to disclose its use to their oncology treatment team. Often, cam agents are not well studied, and little is known about their potential interactions with chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or biologic therapies, and their correlations with outcomes. In the present study, we set out to determine the rate of cam use in patients receiving treatment at a Northern Ontario cancer centre. Methods: Patients reporting for treatment at the Northeast Cancer Centre (necc) in Sudbury, Ontario, were asked to complete an anonymous questionnaire to assess cam use. Changes in cam use before, compared with after, diagnosis were also assessed. Results: Patients in Northern Ontario reported significant cam use both before and after diagnosis. However, as a function of the cam type, cam use was greatly enhanced after cancer diagnosis. For example, the number of patients who reported use of biologic products increased to 51.8% after a cancer diagnosis from 15.6% before a cancer diagnosis. Patients reported much smaller changes in the use of alternative medical systems or spiritual therapy after diagnosis. Vitamin use was reported by 66% of respondents, and the number of different cams used correlated significantly with the reported number of vitamins used. Conclusions: Use of cam, particularly biologic products, increased significantly after a cancer diagnosis. Further studies are required to examine the effect of cam use on the efficacy and safety of cancer therapies.
Background: Cancerpatients are increasingly seeking out complementary and alternative medicine (cam) and might be reluctant to disclose its use to their oncology treatment team. Often, cam agents are not well studied, and little is known about their potential interactions with chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or biologic therapies, and their correlations with outcomes. In the present study, we set out to determine the rate of cam use in patients receiving treatment at a Northern Ontario cancer centre. Methods:Patients reporting for treatment at the Northeast Cancer Centre (necc) in Sudbury, Ontario, were asked to complete an anonymous questionnaire to assess cam use. Changes in cam use before, compared with after, diagnosis were also assessed. Results:Patients in Northern Ontario reported significant cam use both before and after diagnosis. However, as a function of the cam type, cam use was greatly enhanced after cancer diagnosis. For example, the number of patients who reported use of biologic products increased to 51.8% after a cancer diagnosis from 15.6% before a cancer diagnosis. Patients reported much smaller changes in the use of alternative medical systems or spiritual therapy after diagnosis. Vitamin use was reported by 66% of respondents, and the number of different cams used correlated significantly with the reported number of vitamins used. Conclusions: Use of cam, particularly biologic products, increased significantly after a cancer diagnosis. Further studies are required to examine the effect of cam use on the efficacy and safety of cancer therapies.
Entities:
Keywords:
Complementary and alternative medicine; natural products; questionnaires
Authors: Carmen Loquai; Dagmar Dechent; Marlene Garzarolli; Martin Kaatz; Katharina C Kaehler; Peter Kurschat; Frank Meiss; Oliver Micke; Ralph Muecke; Karsten Muenstedt; Annette Stein; Dorothée Nashan; Christoph Stoll; Irene Schmidtmann; Jutta Huebner Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2016-12-14 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Suzanne C Tough; David W Johnston; Marja J Verhoef; Keith Arthur; Heather Bryant Journal: Altern Ther Health Med Date: 2002 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 1.305
Authors: Darren Hunter; Christopher Marinakis; Ruth Salisbury; Alison Cray; Richard Oates Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-10-08 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Kerstin A Kessel; Sabrina Lettner; Carmen Kessel; Henning Bier; Tilo Biedermann; Helmut Friess; Peter Herrschbach; Jürgen E Gschwend; Bernhard Meyer; Christian Peschel; Roland Schmid; Markus Schwaiger; Klaus-Dietrich Wolff; Stephanie E Combs Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-11-03 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Kaitlyn Lapen; Elaine Cha; Christina C Huang; David M Rosenberg; Michael K Rooney; Mark McArthur; Ritu Arya; Christina H Son; Anne R McCall; Daniel W Golden Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-04-06 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Andrew L Coveler; Jonathan Mizrahi; Bory Eastman; Smith Jim Apisarnthanarax; Shalini Dalal; Terry McNearney; Shubham Pant Journal: Oncologist Date: 2021-05-12
Authors: Jochen Rutz; Andrea Janicova; Katja Woidacki; Felix K-H Chun; Roman A Blaheta; Borna Relja Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2020-05-26 Impact factor: 5.923