Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Mar 11;27(3):e286-e293.
doi: 10.1093/oncolo/oyac020.

Complementary Medicine Use Amongst Patients with Metastatic Cancer Enrolled in Phase III Clinical Trials

J Connor Wells  1 , Aven Sidhu  2 , Keyue Ding  3 , Martin Smoragiewicz  3 , Daniel Y C Heng  4 , Frances A Shepherd  5 , Peter M Ellis  6 , Penelope A Bradbury  7 , Derek J Jonker  8 , Lillian L Siu  5 , Karen A Gelmon  8 , Christos Karapetis  9 , Jeremy Shapiro  10 , Louise Nott  11 , Christopher J O'Callaghan  3 , Wendy R Parulekar  3 , Lesley Seymour  3 , Jose G Monzon  4
Affiliations

Complementary Medicine Use Amongst Patients with Metastatic Cancer Enrolled in Phase III Clinical Trials

J Connor Wells et al. Oncologist. .

Abstract

Background: Complementary medicines (CM) are frequently used by patients with cancer. Controversy exists over the effectiveness and risk that CM may add to conventional cancer therapy. The incidence of CM use among patients enrolled in phase III clinical trials is unknown.

Methods: Medication lists from 6 international phase III clinical trials were retrospectively reviewed to identify patients using CM. Patients had metastatic breast, colorectal, or lung cancers. Quality of life, adverse events, overall survival, and progression-free survival were compared between CM users and non-users. Baseline differences between groups were adjusted with propensity score matching groups.

Results: Seven hundred and six of 3446 patients (20.5%) used at least one CM. CM use was highest among patients with breast cancer (35.6%). CM users had more favorable baseline prognostic factors (ECOG 0-1, non-smoking status, younger age, and fewer metastases). CM use was associated with lower rates of adverse events (50% vs. 62%, P = .002) and quality of life was similar between both groups. After adjustment with propensity score matching, CM use was also associated with longer overall survival in patients with lung cancer (adjusted hazard ratio 0.80, 95%CI, 0.68-0.94, P =.0054). However, several key control variables like EGFR status were not available.

Conclusion: One in 5 patients in phase III clinical trials report using CM. CM was not associated with worse cancer-specific outcomes. However, CM users had more favorable baseline prognostic factors, and likely other confounders that may have contributed to improved outcomes observed in the lung cohort. Physicians should monitor for CM use and potential interactions with clinical trial drugs.

Keywords: cancer; clinical trial; complementary medicine.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
a-d: Kaplan-Meier curves depicting overall survival between complementary medicine (CM) users (n = 706) and non–CM users (n = 2740). Risk of death was lower in CM users (aHR 0.873, 95% CI, 0.735-0.930, P < .001) (a) and among CM users with lung cancer (aHR 0.795, 95% CI, 0.676-0.935, P = .005) (b). No significant differences in OS are noted between CM users and non-users with colorectal cancer (c) or breast cancer (d).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
a-d: Kaplan-Meier curves depicting progression-free survival between complementary medicine (CM) users (n = 706) and non–CM users (n = 2740). Risk of progression was lower in CM users (aHR 0.900, 95% CI, 0.829-0.987, P = .024) (a) and among CM users with lung cancer (aHR 0.834, 95% CI, 0.719-0.968, P = .016) (b). No significant differences in progression-free survival are noted between CM users and non-users with colorectal cancer (c) or breast cancer (d).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. NCCIH. Complementary, Alternative, or Integrative Health: What’s In a Name?. https://nccih.nih.gov/health/integrative-health. Accessed October 23, 2019.
    1. Clarke TC, Black LI, Stussman BJ, et al. Trends in the use of complementary health approaches among adults: United States, 2002–2012. Natl Health Stat Rep. 2015;(79):1-16. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Richardson MA, Sanders T, Palmer JL, Greisinger A, Singletary SE. Complementary/alternative medicine use in a comprehensive cancer center and the implications for oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(13):2505-2514. - PubMed
    1. Dy GK, Bekele L, Hanson LJ, et al. Complementary and alternative medicine use by patients enrolled onto phase I clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(23):4810-4815. - PubMed
    1. Naing A, Stephen SK, Frenkel M, et al. Prevalence of complementary medicine use in a phase 1 clinical trials program: the MD Anderson Cancer Center Experience. Cancer. 2011;117(22):5142-5150. - PubMed

MeSH terms