The use of complementary and alternative medicine among Malay breast cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: A cross-sectional studywas carried out to determine the prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use by breast cancer survivors. METHODS: A descriptivesurveydesignwasdeveloped. Information on sociodemographic characteristics, cancer clinical treatment history, and use of CAM were obtained through a modified self-administered questionnaire from 116 Malay breast cancer survivors aged 21 to 67 years who were 2 years postdiagnosis and currently undergoing follow-up treatment at breast cancer clinics at Hospital Kuala Lumpur and Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre. RESULTS: Data suggest that 64% of the participants were identified as CAM users; dietary supplements were the most common form used, followed by prayer and Malay traditional medicine. Within the wide range of dietary supplements, multivitamins were most often taken followed by spirulina, vitamin C, evening primrose oil, and herbal products. Contrary to other findings, the CAM users were found to be older, had secondary education levels, and were from middle-income households. However, there was no significant difference between CAM users and nonusers in this study. Family members played an important role as the main source of information along with doctors/health care providers, friends, and printed materials/mass media. The reasons participants gave for using CAM were mainly to assist in healing the body's inner strength, to cure cancer, and to reduce stress. Only half of the participants consulted with their physicians regarding the safety of CAM use. The participants began to use CAM while undergoing clinical treatments. Most of the participants used CAM for more than a year. About RM100 to RM149 (31.88 USD to 47.50 USD at press time) were spent monthly on CAM by 32% of the participants. The CAM use was found to be effective and beneficial for patients' disease states, and they were contented with the usage of the CAM therapies. Multivariate analysis revealed that thedecision to use or not to use CAM was not dependent on sociodemographic background or cancer clinical treatment history. CONCLUSIONS: CAM was commonly used by breast cancer survivors as a coping mechanism to battle the disease.

Immunohistochemical expression of pi class glutathione S-transferase and alpha-fetoprotein in hepatocellular carcinoma and chronic liver disease.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether tumor marker pi glutathione transferase (GST-pi) is expressed in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and other chronic liver diseases and to compare its expression with that of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP). STUDY DESIGN: Samples used were formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded liver tissues: normal (n = 3), chronic hepatitis B (n = 15), cirrhosis (n = 15) and HCC (n = 30). The expression of AFP and GST-pi was detected by using immunohistochemistry with the peroxidase-antiperoxidase method. AFP immunoreactivity was based on the cytoplasm of the hepatocytes, while GST-pi immunoreactivity was based on the nuclei of hepatocytes. RESULTS: In normal liver tissues, AFP was not expressed. However, there was strong staining of GST-pi in bile duct epithelium cells and weak staining in hepatocytes. Our results showed higher AFP immunoreactivity in cases of HCC (36.7%) as compared to cirrhosis (6.7%) and hepatitis B (0%), whereas GST-pi immunoreactivity was lower in cases of HCC (53.3%) as compared to cases of cirrhosis (100.0%) and hepatitis B (93.3%). Percent sensitivity of AFP determination for HCC was 36.7% as compared to 53.3% for GST-pi, thus making GST-pi a more sensitive marker for detection of HCC. This study showed a significant relationship between the intensity and percentage of cells stained in hepatitis B, cirrhosis and HCC for GST-pi immunoreactivity (P < .001, .001 and .05, respectively) but not for AFP (P > .05). Statistical analysis showed that there was no significant relationship between expression of AFP and GST-pi in cirrhosis and HCC cases. Hepatitis B virus infection in HCC cases showed a positive rate of 46.7%, with AFP staining positively in 42.9% of tissues and GST-pi staining positively in 57.1% of tissues. CONCLUSION: AFP is a diagnostic but rather insensitive tissue marker for HCC. However, the absence of AFP in benign chronic liver disease makes this marker useful in differentiating between HCC and other chronic liver diseases, whereas GST-pi can be used as a diagnostic marker for HCC as well as in detecting other chronic liver diseases.