Correlation between an integrative oncology treatment program and survival in patients with advanced gynecological cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Integrative oncology (IO) is increasingly becoming part of palliative cancer care. This study examined the correlation between an IO treatment program and rates of survival among patients with advanced gynecological cancer. METHODS: Patients were referred by their oncology healthcare professionals to an integrative physician (IP) for consultation and IO treatments. Those undergoing at least 4 treatments during the 6 weeks following the consultation were considered adherence to the integrative care program (AIC), versus non-adherent (non-AIC). Survival was monitored for a period of 3 years, comparing the AIC vs. non-AIC groups, as well as controls who did not attend the IP consultation. RESULTS: A total of 189 patients were included: 71 in the AIC group, 44 non-AIC, and 74 controls. Overall 3-year survival was greater in the AIC group (vs. non-AIC, p = 0.012; vs. controls, p = 0.003), with no difference found between non-AIC and controls (p = 0.954). Multimodal IO programs (≥ 3 modalities) were correlated in the AIC group with greater overall 3-year survival (p = 0.027). Greater rates of survival were also found in the AIC group at 12 (p = 0.004) and 18 months (p = 0.001). When compared with the AIC group, a multivariate analysis found higher crude and adjusted hazard ratios for 3-year mortality in the non-AIC group (HR 95% CI 2.18 (1.2-3.9), p = 0.010) and controls (2.23 (1.35-3.7), p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Adherence to an IO treatment program was associated with higher survival rates among patients with advanced gynecological cancer. Larger prospective trials are needed to explore whether the IO setting enhances patients' resilience, coping, and adherence to oncology treatment.

Safety of herbal medicine use during chemotherapy in patients with ovarian cancer: a "bedside-to-bench" approach.

In this study, we explored herbal supplements used by patients during chemotherapy and test for herb-drug interactions and response of cancer cells to treatment. Patients with gynecological cancer referred to a complementary and integrative medicine (CIM) service were asked about their use of herbal medicine during chemotherapy. The leading five clinically relevant herbs selected for cytotoxicity analysis included the following: wheatgrass (Triticum aestivum), European mistletoe (Viscum album), ginger (Zingiber officinale), Ephedra (Ephedra campylopoda), and Oriental mistletoe (Viscum cruciatum). Cytotoxicity was examined using XTT assays in cisplatin-sensitive and resistant ovarian cancer cell lines (A2780, A2780CisR), and non-cancer kidney cells (HEK-293). The effect of the selected herbs on carboplatin and paclitaxel cytotoxicity was tested as well. Pro-apoptotic effects were tested using Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) cleavage. Of 98 patients referred to the CIM service, 42 (42.9%) reported using/intending to use herbal products during chemotherapy. European mistletoe and ginger exhibited significant anti-cancer activity in cisplatin-sensitive and resistant ovarian cells. Wheatgrass and ephedra reduced cytotoxicity of carboplatin on cisplatin-sensitive ovarian cancer cells, while ginger, European and Oriental mistletoe increased chemosensitivity in both cancer cell lines. Wheatgrass, European mistletoe, and ginger increased sensitivity to cisplatin-resistant cells treated with carboplatin and paclitaxel. No effect was observed with the addition of any of the herbs on non-cancerous embryonic kidney cells (HEK-293). Herbal medicine use by patients with ovarian cancer may influence anti-cancer activity of chemotherapy. Integrative physicians can provide "bedside-to-bench" guidance on the safety of these products.

Quality-of-life outcomes in patients with gynecologic cancer referred to integrative oncology treatment during chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: Integrative oncology incorporates complementary medicine (CM) therapies in patients with cancer. We explored the impact of an integrative oncology therapeutic regimen on quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes in women with gynecological cancer undergoing chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective preference study examined patients referred by oncology health care practitioners (HCPs) to an integrative physician (IP) consultation and CM treatments. QOL and chemotherapy-related toxicities were evaluated using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCAW) questionnaire, at baseline and at a 6-12-week follow-up assessment. Adherence to the integrative care (AIC) program was defined as ≥ 4 CM treatments, with ≤ 30 days between each session. RESULTS: Of 128 patients referred by their HCP, 102 underwent IP consultation and subsequent CM treatments. The main concerns expressed by patients were fatigue (79.8%), gastrointestinal symptoms (64.6%), pain and neuropathy (54.5 %), and emotional distress (45.5%). Patients in both AIC (n = 68) and non-AIC (n = 28) groups shared similar demographic, treatment, and cancer-related characteristics. ESAS fatigue scores improved by a mean of 1.97 points in the AIC group on a scale of 0-10 and worsened by a mean of 0.27 points in the non-AIC group (p = 0.033). In the AIC group, MYCAW scores improved significantly (p < 0.0001) for each of the leading concerns as well as for well-being, a finding which was not apparent in the non-AIC group. CONCLUSIONS: An IP-guided CM treatment regimen provided to patients with gynecological cancer during chemotherapy may reduce cancer-related fatigue and improve other QOL outcomes.

Expectations from an integrative medicine consultation in breast cancer care: a registry protocol-based study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to compare the rationale given by oncology health care practitioners (HCPs) for referral of their patients with breast cancer to a complementary medicine (CM) consultation with patient expectations from the CM treatment process. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, registry protocol-based, open-label study. We compared the indications given by oncology HCPs for their referral of patients to the CM consultation with patient expectations from the CM therapeutic process. Patients were asked regarding prior CM use for cancer- and non-cancer-related indications. RESULTS: A total of 127 patients referred to the CM consultation were studied, with half reporting prior CM use. The most popular treatment for non-cancer-related indications was acupuncture (46.9 %), with only 20.3 % reporting herbal medicine use (P ≤ 0.04). For cancer-related indications, herbal medicine was the most popular modality (42.4 %), with 11.6 % reporting acupuncture use. The most frequently cited indications for referral were general symptom reduction (19.7 %), emotional/spiritual relief (18.1 %), alleviation of weakness and fatigue (17.3 %), and reduction of gastrointestinal symptoms (10.2 %). For patients, the most important outcome was alleviation of weakness and fatigue (70.4 %), followed by emotional/spiritual relief (50 %), and the reduction of gastrointestinal symptoms (33.3 %). The correlation between HCP indications for referral and patient expectations was poor (Cohen's kappa of 0.19, 0.328, and 0.20, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that expectations from a CM treatment process differ greatly between oncology HCPs and patients with breast cancer. The use of a structured clinical referral process and a better understanding of patient concerns are factors which play a central role in the CM referral process.

Barriers and challenges in integration of anthroposophic medicine in supportive breast cancer care.

In the last decade, more and more oncology centers are challenged with complementary medicine (CM) integration within supportive breast cancer care. Quality of life (QOL) improvement and attenuation of oncology treatment side effects are the core objectives of integrative CM programs in cancer care. Yet, limited research is available on the use of specific CM modalities in an integrative setting and on cancer patients' compliance with CM consultation. Studies are especially warranted to view the clinical application of researched CM modalities, such as anthroposophic medicine (AM), a unique CM modality oriented to cancer supportive care. Our objective was to characterize consultation patterns provided by physicians trained in CM following oncology health-care practitioners' referral of patients receiving chemotherapy. We aimed to identify characteristics of patients who consulted with AM and to explore patients' compliance to AM treatment. Of the 341 patients consulted with integrative physicians, 138 were diagnosed with breast cancer. Following integrative physician consultation, 56 patients were advised about AM treatment and 285 about other CM modalities. Logistic multivariate regression model found that, compared with patients receiving non-anthroposophic CM, the AM group had significantly greater rates of previous CM use [EXP(B) = 3.25, 95% C.I. 1.64-6.29, p = 0.001] and higher rates of cancer recurrence at baseline (p = 0.038). Most AM users (71.4%) used a single AM modality, such as mistletoe (viscum album) injections, oral AM supplements, or music therapy. Compliance with AM modalities following physician recommendation ranged from 44% to 71% of patients. We conclude that AM treatment provided within the integrative oncology setting is feasible based on compliance assessment. Other studies are warranted to explore the effectiveness of AM in improving patients' QOL during chemotherapy.