M Freuding1, C Keinki1, O Micke2, J Buentzel3, Jutta Huebner4. 1. Klinik für Innere Medizin II, Hämatologie und Internistische Onkologie, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany. 2. Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Franziskus Hospital, Kiskerstraße 26, 33615, Bielefeld, Germany. 3. Klinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Heilkunde, Südharzklinikum Nordhausen, Dr.-Robert-Koch-Straße 39, 99734, Nordhausen, Germany. 4. Klinik für Innere Medizin II, Hämatologie und Internistische Onkologie, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany. jutta.huebner@med.uni-jena.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Mistletoe treatment of cancer patients is discussed highly controversial in the scientific literature. Aim of this systematic review is to give an extensive overview about current state of research concerning mistletoe therapy of oncologic patients regarding survival, quality of life and safety. METHODS: In September and October 2017 Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PsycINFO, CINAHL and "Science Citation Index Expanded" (Web of Science) were systematically searched. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 3647 hits and 28 publications with 2639 patients were finally included in this review. Mistletoe was used in bladder cancer, breast cancer, other gynecological cancers (cervical cancer, corpus uteri cancer, and ovarian cancer), colorectal cancer, other gastrointestinal cancer (gastric cancer and pancreatic cancer), glioma, head and neck cancer, lung cancer, melanoma and osteosarcoma. In nearly all studies, mistletoe was added to a conventional therapy. Patient relevant endpoints were overall survival (14 studies, n = 1054), progression- or disease-free survival or tumor response (10 studies, n = 1091). Most studies did not show any effect of mistletoe on survival. Especially high quality studies do not show any benefit. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to survival, a thorough review of the literature does not provide any indication to prescribe mistletoe to patients with cancer.
PURPOSE: Mistletoe treatment of cancerpatients is discussed highly controversial in the scientific literature. Aim of this systematic review is to give an extensive overview about current state of research concerning mistletoe therapy of oncologic patients regarding survival, quality of life and safety. METHODS: In September and October 2017 Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PsycINFO, CINAHL and "Science Citation Index Expanded" (Web of Science) were systematically searched. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 3647 hits and 28 publications with 2639 patients were finally included in this review. Mistletoe was used in bladder cancer, breast cancer, other gynecological cancers (cervical cancer, corpus uteri cancer, and ovarian cancer), colorectal cancer, other gastrointestinal cancer (gastric cancer and pancreatic cancer), glioma, head and neck cancer, lung cancer, melanoma and osteosarcoma. In nearly all studies, mistletoe was added to a conventional therapy. Patient relevant endpoints were overall survival (14 studies, n = 1054), progression- or disease-free survival or tumor response (10 studies, n = 1091). Most studies did not show any effect of mistletoe on survival. Especially high quality studies do not show any benefit. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to survival, a thorough review of the literature does not provide any indication to prescribe mistletoe to patients with cancer.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer; Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM); Mistletoe; Patient-relevant outcomes
Authors: H Matthes; R-D Hofheinz; G Bar-Sela; D Galun; D Martin; R Huber; J Langhorts; P F Matthiessen; F Schad Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2019-05-21 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Sonja Schötterl; Jennifer T Miemietz; Elena I Ilina; Naita M Wirsik; Ingrid Ehrlich; Andrea Gall; Stephan M Huber; Hans Lentzen; Michel Mittelbronn; Ulrike Naumann Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2019-07-03 Impact factor: 2.629
Authors: Jutta Hübner; Matthias Beckmann; Markus Follmann; Monika Nothacker; Franz Josef Prott; Bernhard Wörmann Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 8.251
Authors: Harald Matthes; Anja Thronicke; Ralf-Dieter Hofheinz; Erik Baars; David Martin; Roman Huber; Thomas Breitkreuz; Gil Bar-Sela; Daniel Galun; Friedemann Schad Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 2.629
Authors: Massimiliano Berretta; Luca Rinaldi; Rosaria Taibi; Paolo Tralongo; Alberto Fulvi; Vincenzo Montesarchio; Giordano Madeddu; Paolo Magistri; Sabrina Bimonte; Marco Trovò; Patrizia Gnagnarella; Arturo Cuomo; Marco Cascella; Arben Lleshi; Guglielmo Nasti; Sergio Facchini; Francesco Fiorica; Raffaele Di Francia; Giuseppe Nunnari; Giovanni Francesco Pellicanò; Aurelio Guglielmino; Marco Danova; Sabrina Rossetti; Alfonso Amore; Anna Crispo; Gaetano Facchini Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2020-04-28 Impact factor: 6.244