Anna Wagenknecht1, Jennifer Dörfler1, Maren Freuding1, Lena Josfeld1, Jutta Huebner2. 1. Klinik Für Innere Medizin II, Hämatologie und Internistische Onkologie, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany. 2. 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: In this systematic review we included clinical studies from 1800 until 2020 to evaluate evidence of the effectiveness of homeopathy on physical and mental conditions in patients during oncological treatment. METHOD: In February 2021 a systematic search was conducted searching five electronic databases (Embase, Cochrane, PsychInfo, CINAHL and Medline) to find studies concerning use, effectiveness and potential harm of homeopathy in cancer patients. RESULTS: From all 1352 search results, 18 studies with 2016 patients were included in this SR. The patients treated with homeopathy were mainly diagnosed with breast cancer. The therapy concepts include single and combination homeopathic remedies (used systemically or as mouth rinses) of various dilutions. Outcomes assessed were the influence on toxicity of cancer treatment (mostly hot flashes and menopausal symptoms), time to drain removal in breast cancer patients after mastectomy, survival, quality of life, global health and subjective well-being, anxiety and depression as well as safety and tolerance. The included studies reported heterogeneous results: some studies described significant differences in quality of life or toxicity of cancer treatment favouring homeopathy, whereas others did not find an effect or reported significant differences to the disadvantage of homeopathy or side effects caused by homeopathy. The majority of the studies have a low methodological quality. CONCLUSIONS: For homeopathy, there is neither a scientifically based hypothesis of its mode of action nor conclusive evidence from clinical studies in cancer care.
PURPOSE: In this systematic review we included clinical studies from 1800 until 2020 to evaluate evidence of the effectiveness of homeopathy on physical and mental conditions in patients during oncological treatment. METHOD: In February 2021 a systematic search was conducted searching five electronic databases (Embase, Cochrane, PsychInfo, CINAHL and Medline) to find studies concerning use, effectiveness and potential harm of homeopathy in cancer patients. RESULTS: From all 1352 search results, 18 studies with 2016 patients were included in this SR. The patients treated with homeopathy were mainly diagnosed with breast cancer. The therapy concepts include single and combination homeopathic remedies (used systemically or as mouth rinses) of various dilutions. Outcomes assessed were the influence on toxicity of cancer treatment (mostly hot flashes and menopausal symptoms), time to drain removal in breast cancer patients after mastectomy, survival, quality of life, global health and subjective well-being, anxiety and depression as well as safety and tolerance. The included studies reported heterogeneous results: some studies described significant differences in quality of life or toxicity of cancer treatment favouring homeopathy, whereas others did not find an effect or reported significant differences to the disadvantage of homeopathy or side effects caused by homeopathy. The majority of the studies have a low methodological quality. CONCLUSIONS: For homeopathy, there is neither a scientifically based hypothesis of its mode of action nor conclusive evidence from clinical studies in cancer care.
Authors: Jutta Huebner; Karsten Muenstedt; Franz J Prott; Christoph Stoll; Oliver Micke; Jens Buentzel; Ralph Muecke; Bianca Senf Journal: Breast Care (Basel) Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Katharina Gaertner; Michael Müllner; Helmut Friehs; Ernst Schuster; Christine Marosi; Ilse Muchitsch; Michael Frass; Alan David Kaye Journal: Complement Ther Med Date: 2014-01-08 Impact factor: 2.446
Authors: Laura M Kemppainen; Teemu T Kemppainen; Jutta A Reippainen; Suvi T Salmenniemi; Pia H Vuolanto Journal: Scand J Public Health Date: 2017-10-04 Impact factor: 3.021