Classical homeopathy in the treatment of cancer patients--a prospective observational study of two independent cohorts.

Tumour Biology Center at Albert Ludwig's University Freiburg, Germany.
BMC Cancer (Impact Factor: 3.32). 01/2011; 11:19. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-11-19
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Many cancer patients seek homeopathy as a complementary therapy. It has rarely been studied systematically, whether homeopathic care is of benefit for cancer patients.
We conducted a prospective observational study with cancer patients in two differently treated cohorts: one cohort with patients under complementary homeopathic treatment (HG; n = 259), and one cohort with conventionally treated cancer patients (CG; n = 380). For a direct comparison, matched pairs with patients of the same tumour entity and comparable prognosis were to be formed. Main outcome parameter: change of quality of life (FACT-G, FACIT-Sp) after 3 months. Secondary outcome parameters: change of quality of life (FACT-G, FACIT-Sp) after a year, as well as impairment by fatigue (MFI) and by anxiety and depression (HADS).
HG: FACT-G, or FACIT-Sp, respectively improved statistically significantly in the first three months, from 75.6 (SD 14.6) to 81.1 (SD 16.9), or from 32.1 (SD 8.2) to 34.9 (SD 8.32), respectively. After 12 months, a further increase to 84.1 (SD 15.5) or 35.2 (SD 8.6) was found. Fatigue (MFI) decreased; anxiety and depression (HADS) did not change. CG: FACT-G remained constant in the first three months: 75.3 (SD 17.3) at t0, and 76.6 (SD 16.6) at t1. After 12 months, there was a slight increase to 78.9 (SD 18.1). FACIT-Sp scores improved significantly from t0 (31.0 - SD 8.9) to t1 (32.1 - SD 8.9) and declined again after a year (31.6 - SD 9.4). For fatigue, anxiety, and depression, no relevant changes were found. 120 patients of HG and 206 patients of CG met our criteria for matched-pairs selection. Due to large differences between the two patient populations, however, only 11 matched pairs could be formed. This is not sufficient for a comparative study.
In our prospective study, we observed an improvement of quality of life as well as a tendency of fatigue symptoms to decrease in cancer patients under complementary homeopathic treatment. It would take considerably larger samples to find matched pairs suitable for comparison in order to establish a definite causal relation between these effects and homeopathic treatment.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Homeopathy is a form of therapy based on the similarity (“similia similibus curantur”, like cures like), whose popularity is increasing but whose scientific basis is still under discussion. Starting from the premise that it is a “holistic” medicine, programmatically aimed at the whole person in its entirety and individuality, here we go through an overview of his history, basic concepts and scientific evidence. This therapy was founded by Samuel Hahnemann in the late 18th century, although similar concepts existed previously. It has spread around the world in the 19th century, in part because of its success in epidemics outbreaks, but declined during most of the 20th century. Its popularity was increased in the late 20th and early 21st century in many parts of the world and today stands the problem of its integration with conventional medicine. There are different schools of homeopathy. Homeopathy is controversial mainly because of its use of highly diluted medicines, but there is growing evidence that is not a mere placebo. There is a significant body of clinical research including randomized clinical trials suggesting that homeopathy has an effectiveness in curing many symptoms and in improving the quality of life of patients. Cohort studies, observational and economic have produced favorable results. Despite the long history of scientific controversy, homeopathy is an “anomaly” of modern medicine that deserves further investigation for its potential scientific and ethical merits.
    Journal of Medicine and the Person. 12/2014;
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In traditional systems of medicine including homeopathy, the Condurango extract (Con) is often used to cure stomach cancer mainly, without having any scientific validation of its anti-cancer ability. Con has therefore been tested against non-small-cell lung cancer cells (NSCLC) A549 and NCI-H522 (H522) known to contain the KRAS mutation, making them resistant to most chemotherapeutic agents. As cancer cells generally defy cytotoxicity developed by chemopreventive agents and escape cell death, any drug showing the capability of preferentially killing cancer cells through apoptosis is worth consideration for judicious application. A549 and H522 cells were exposed to and of Con, respectively, for 48 h and analysed based on various protocols associated with apoptosis and DNA damage, such as MTT assay to determine cell viability, LDH assay, DNA fragmentation assay, comet assay, and microscopical examinations of DNA binding fluorescence stains like DAPI, Hoechst 33258 and acridine orange/ethidium bromide to determine the extent of DNA damage made in drug-treated and untreated cells and the results compared. Changes in mitochondrial membrane potential and the generation of reactive oxygen species were also documented through standard techniques. Con killed almost 50% of the cancer cells but spared normal cells significantly. Fluorescence studies revealed increased DNA nick formation and depolarized membrane potentials after drug treatment in both cell types. Caspase-3 expression levels confirmed the apoptosis-inducing potential of Con in both the NSCLC lines. Thus, overall results suggest considerable anticancer potential of Con against NSCLC in vitro, validating its use against lung cancer by practitioners of traditional medicine including homeopathy.
    TANG. 02/2013; 3(1).
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 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.
    Homeopathy 07/2014; 103(4). · 0.75 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

Available from
May 31, 2014