Commonly used methods of complementary medicine in the treatment of breast cancer

Immunological and Quality-of-Life Profiles in Women with Breast Cancer: Complementary versus Conventional Care

BACKGROUND

Previous studies showed that women with breast cancer treated in anthroposophic clinic versus conventional care had increased quality of life (QoL) parameters, fighting spirit, and anxiety coping. We have now analyzed immune and QoL factors in these 2 groups for possible differences during the first 6 months after admission, prompted by anthroposophic studies, including mistletoe extracts, showing beneficial immune system effects.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fourteen immunological variables, including leukocyte count, lymphocyte count, activated T cells (CD4+ and CD8+), NK cells, B cells, IL1β, IL6, IL10, and oxytocin, were longitudinally analyzed in both groups (n = 2 × 26). A panel of QoL parameters were analyzed using 3 different instruments. Statistical evaluation included that each patient was its own control.

RESULTS

Cytotoxic CD8+ T cell frequency (percent of lymphocytes analyzed by flow-cytometry) significantly decreased over time in the anthroposophic group versus the conventional group (repeated measures ANOVA, p = 0.05). No major differences were observed in other immunological parameters, whereas QoL variables, anxiety decreased and physical symptoms increased/improved significantly in the anthroposophic group (p = 0.04 and p = 0.05, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Overall, women with breast cancer in anthroposophic or conventional therapy did not differ in their immune profiles over time, with exception of decreased cytotoxic T cells in the anthroposophic group. Improvement in physical symptoms along with less anxiety in this group may have influenced the brain-immune axis resulting in lower frequency of CD8+ T cells, a feature associated with less aggressive cancer stages. To evaluate whether this observation is associated with good or bad prognosis, further detailed analyses of memory and naïve CD8+ T cells at tumor site and in blood circulation are essential.

Phytotherapy and Nutritional Supplements on Breast Cancer

Breast cancer is the most frequent type of nonskin malignancy among women worldwide. In general, conventional cancer treatment options (i.e., surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, biological therapy, and hormone therapy) are not completely effective. Recurrence and other pathologic situations are still an issue in breast cancer patients due to side effects, toxicity of drugs in normal cells, and aggressive behaviour of the tumours. From this point of view, breast cancer therapy and adjuvant methods represent a promising and challenging field for researchers. In the last few years, the use of some types of complementary medicines by women with a history of breast cancer has significantly increased such as phytotherapeutic products and nutritional supplements. Despite this, the use of such approaches in oncologic processes may be problematic and patient's health risks can arise such as interference with the efficacy of standard cancer treatment. The present review gives an overview of the most usual phytotherapeutic products and nutritional supplements with application in breast cancer patients as adjuvant approach. Regardless of the contradictory results of scientific evidence, we demonstrated the need to perform additional investigation, mainly well-designed clinical trials in order to establish correlations and allow for further validated outcomes concerning the efficacy, safety, and clinical evidence-based recommendation of these products.

Web Conversations About Complementary and Alternative Medicines and Cancer: Content and Sentiment Analysis

Background

The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among cancer patients is widespread and mostly self-administrated. Today, one of the most relevant topics is the nondisclosure of CAM use to doctors. This general lack of communication exposes patients to dangerous behaviors and to less reliable information channels, such as the Web. The Italian context scarcely differs from this trend. Today, we are able to mine and analyze systematically the unstructured information available in the Web, to get an insight of people’s opinions, beliefs, and rumors concerning health topics.

Objective

Our aim was to analyze Italian Web conversations about CAM, identifying the most relevant Web sources, therapies, and diseases and measure the related sentiment.

Methods

Data have been collected using the Web Intelligence tool ifMONITOR. The workflow consisted of 6 phases: (1) eligibility criteria definition for the ifMONITOR search profile; (2) creation of a CAM terminology database; (3) generic Web search and automatic filtering, the results have been manually revised to refine the search profile, and stored in the ifMONITOR database; (4) automatic classification using the CAM database terms; (5) selection of the final sample and manual sentiment analysis using a 1-5 score range; (6) manual indexing of the Web sources and CAM therapies type retrieved. Descriptive univariate statistics were computed for each item: absolute frequency, percentage, central tendency (mean sentiment score [MSS]), and variability (standard variation σ).

Results

Overall, 212 Web sources, 423 Web documents, and 868 opinions have been retrieved. The overall sentiment measured tends to a good score (3.6 of 5). Quite a high polarization in the opinions of the conversation partaking emerged from standard variation analysis (σ≥1). In total, 126 of 212 (59.4%) Web sources retrieved were nonhealth-related. Facebook (89; 21%) and Yahoo Answers (41; 9.7%) were the most relevant. In total, 94 CAM therapies have been retrieved. Most belong to the “biologically based therapies or nutrition” category: 339 of 868 opinions (39.1%), showing an MSS of 3.9 (σ=0.83). Within nutrition, “diets” collected 154 opinions (18.4%) with an MSS of 3.8 (σ=0.87); “food as CAM” overall collected 112 opinions (12.8%) with a MSS of 4 (σ=0.68). Excluding diets and food, the most discussed CAM therapy is the controversial Italian “Di Bella multitherapy” with 102 opinions (11.8%) with an MSS of 3.4 (σ=1.21). Breast cancer was the most mentioned disease: 81 opinions of 868.

Conclusions

Conversations about CAM and cancer are ubiquitous. There is a great concern about the biologically based therapies, perceived as harmless and useful, under-rating all risks related to dangerous interactions or malnutrition. Our results can be useful to doctors to be aware of the implications of these beliefs for the clinical practice. Web conversation exploitation could be a strategy to gain insights of people’s perspective for other controversial topics.