Motivations of patients seeking supportive care for cancer from physicians prescribing homeopathic or conventional medicines: results of an observational cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The motivations of patients who consult a homeopathic (GP-Ho) or conventional (GP-CM) general practitioner for supportive care during cancer treatment have not been widely studied. We investigated the reasons why cancer patients consult a GP-Ho versus a GP-CM for supportive care and the GPs' motivations for their prescriptions. METHODS: This observational survey was carried out in France between October 2008 and October 2011. GPs across France were randomly selected and asked to recruit four cancer patients each. At inclusion, the sociodemographic and clinical (including psychological) characteristics and medical history of the patients were recorded by the GPs and the patients noted their quality of life (QoL) and anxiety/depression using the Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 (QLQ-C30) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) self-questionnaires. The main motivations of the patients regarding the type of GP consultation and the main reasons for the GPs' prescriptions were recorded. RESULTS: Six hundred and forty four patients were included in the analysis: 399 consulted a GP-CM (n = 112) and 245 a GP-Ho (n = 73). Patients consulting a GP-Ho were more often female [OR = 1.93; 95%CI: 1.11-3.35; p = 0.02], employed in a professional capacity [OR = 6.57; 95%CI: 1.96-21.99; p = 0.002], have a shorter time since cancer diagnosis [OR = 2.19; 95%CI: 1.24-3.87; p = 0.007], have received targeted anticancer therapy [OR = 3.70; 95%CI: 1.67-8.18; p = 0.001] and have a high QLQ-C30 score for constipation [OR = 1.01; 95%CI: 1.00-1.02; p = 0.001]. Patients mainly consulted a GP-Ho to receive overall care (73.5% vs. 64.9%; p = 0.024) and medicines to prevent anticancer treatment-related side-effects (63.7% vs. 41.4%; p < 0.0001). In contrast, patients consulted a GP-CM to receive psychological care (50.1% vs. 40.8%; p = 0.021) and more information regarding the oncologists' strategic decisions (p < 0.0001). There was a significantly greater prescription of psychotropic drugs by GP-CM (53.7% vs. 22.4%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients consulting a GP-Ho or GP-CM had different motivations for seeking supportive care. There was a significantly greater prescription of psychotropic drugs by GP-CM.

Open-label uncontrolled pilot study to evaluate complementary therapy with Ruta graveolens 9c in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced metastatic disease are often treated aggressively with multiple lines of chemotherapy, even in the last month of life. The benefit of such an approach remains uncertain. The objective of the study was to investigate whether Ruta graveolens 9c homeopathic medicine can improve quality of life (QoL) and tumour progression in patients with advanced cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a single-centre, open-label, uncontrolled, pilot study. Patients (>18-years, life-expectancy ≥3 months, performance status ≤2) with locally-advanced solid tumours or metastases, previously treated with all available standard anti-cancer treatments were recruited. Oral treatment consisted of two 1-mL ampoules of Ruta graveolens (9c dilution) given daily for a minimum of 8 weeks, or until tumour and/or clinical progression. Primary outcome was QoL measured using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures were anxiety/depression measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), WHO performance status (PS), tumour progression assessed using RECIST criteria and tumour markers, survival and tolerance. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were included (mean age: 64.3 years). Mean duration of treatment was 3.3 months (median: 2.1). QoL global health status improved significantly between baseline and week 8 (P < 0.001) and week 16 (P = 0.035), but was at the limit of significance (P = 0.057) at the end of the study. There was no significant change in anxiety/depression or PS during treatment. Ruta graveolens 9c had no obvious effect on tumour progression. Median survival was 6.7 months [95%CI: 4.8-14.9]. Ruta graveolens 9c was well-tolerated. CONCLUSION: Some patients treated with Ruta graveolens 9c had a transitory improvement in QoL, but the effectiveness of this treatment remains to be confirmed in further studies.