Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Anticancer Res. 2018 Mar;38(3):1585-1593.

Is Mistletoe Treatment Beneficial in Invasive Breast Cancer? A New Approach to an Unresolved Problem.

Author information

1
Department of Clinical Pathology, Robert Bosch Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany.
2
Institute of Stochastics and Applications, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.
3
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany.
4
Radiologie Nuklearmedizin Winnenden, Winnenden, Germany.
5
Margarete Fischer-Bosch-Institute of Clinical Pharmacology and University of Tuebingen, Stuttgart, Germany.
6
Department of Clinical Pharmacology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Stuttgart, Germany.
7
Onkologischer Schwerpunkt Stuttgart e.V., Stuttgart, Germany.
8
Center for Pulmonology and Thoracic Surgery, Klinik Schillerhöhe, Stuttgart-Gerlingen, Germany godehard.friedel@klinik-schillerhoehe.de.

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIM:

In this retrospective study, we compared breast cancer patients treated with and without mistletoe lectin I (ML-I) in addition to standard breast cancer treatment in order to determine a possible effect of this complementary treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS:

This study included 18,528 patients with invasive breast cancer. Data on additional ML-I treatments were reported for 164 patients. We developed a "similar case" method with a distance measure retrieved from the beta variable in Cox regression to compare these patients, after stage adjustment, with their non-ML-1 treated counterparts in order to answer three hypotheses concerning overall survival, recurrence free survival and life quality.

RESULTS:

Raw data analysis of an additional ML-I treatment yielded a worse outcome (p=0.02) for patients with ML treatment, possibly due to a bias inherent in the ML-I-treated patients. Using the "similar case" method (a case-based reasoning approach) we could not confirm this harm for patients using ML-I. Analysis of life quality data did not demonstrate reliable differences between patients treated with ML-I treatment and those without proven ML-I treatment.

CONCLUSION:

Based on a "similar case" model we did not observe any differences in the overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and quality of life data between breast cancer patients with standard treatment and those who in addition to standard treatment received ML-I treatment.

KEYWORDS:

ML 1; breast cancer treatment; complementary medicine; prognosis

PMID:
29491089
DOI:
10.21873/anticanres.12388
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for HighWire
Loading ...
Support Center