Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27316629›Full record

ReviewJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2016

Oral antineoplastic agent interactions with medicinal plants and food: an issue to take into account.

Roberto Collado-Borrell, Vicente Escudero-Vilaplana, Rosa Romero-Jiménez, Irene Iglesias-Peinado, Ana Herranz-Alonso, María Sanjurjo-Sáez

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. The Underrated Risks of Tamoxifen Drug Interactions.European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2018
    Review
  16. Nutrition and neuroendocrine tumors: An update of the literature.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2018
    Review
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Roberto Collado-BorrellPharmacy Department, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Vicente Escudero-VilaplanaPharmacy Department, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, Madrid, Spain. vicente.escudero@salud.madrid.org.
Rosa Romero-JiménezPharmacy Department, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Irene Iglesias-PeinadoCollege of Pharmacy, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Ana Herranz-AlonsoPharmacy Department, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
María Sanjurjo-SáezPharmacy Department, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón · ESUniversidad Complutense de Madrid · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo review interactions between oral antineoplastic agents (OAAs) for the treatment of solid and hematological tumors and common food and medicinal plants. MATERIALS AND

methodsAll potential interactions between OAAs, medicinal plants and food were reviewed. OAAs were considered to be drugs for oral administration that have direct antitumor activity and were approved by the European Medicines Agency in April 2015. We performed the literature search in Pubmed(®) considering only medicinal plants and food. In addition, available data were analyzed from each OAA in secondary data sources taken from Thomson Micromedex(®) and Lexi-comp(®), as well as in the summary of product characteristics.

resultsFifty-eight OAAs were analyzed. We found interactions in 60.3 % of OAAs. Those with most interactions described were: imatinib and procarbazine (4 interactions) and erlotinib, vemurafenib, pomalidomide, medroxyprogesterone and methotrexate (3 interactions). MEDICINAL PLANTS: We found 39 interactions (74.4 % important). St. John's wort was the medicinal plant with most interactions (92.6 % were considered important). The rest were: important (ginseng-imatinib, methotrexate-cola and tobacco-erlotinib and tobacco-pomalidomide) and moderate (caffeine-vemurafenib/medroxyprogesterone, medroxyprogesterone-ruxolitinib/St. John's wort, garlic-anagrelide and ginseng-procarbazine). FOODS: Twenty-six interactions (61.5 % important). Grapefruit had most interactions (82.4 % were considered important). The rest were: important (alcohol-procarbazine) and moderate (dairy-estramustine, methotrexate-ethanol, procarbazine-tyramine, vitamin A-tretinoin/bexarotene and grapefruit-bexarotene/etoposide/sunitinib).

conclusionA review of interactions of medicinal plants and food should be taken into account in the management of OAAs, since more than half have interactions with MPs and food, of which 70.3 % are considered important. The most relevant are HSJ, grapefruit, ginseng and tobacco. This review is intended to serve as a support to all healthcare professionals at the time of prescribing or dispensing OAAs.

Indexed as

Food-Drug InteractionsPlants, EdiblePlants, MedicinalAdministration, OralAntineoplastic AgentsHumansAntineoplastic AgentsFoodInteractionsMedicinal plantsOral antineoplastic agents

Identifiers

PMID27316629
PMCPMC11819140
OpenAlexW2439721508

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.