Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27766453›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2016

Use of complementary and alternative medicine and breast cancer survival in the Health, Eating, Activity, and Lifestyle Study.

Marian L Neuhouser, Ashley Wilder Smith, Stephanie M George, James T Gibson, Kathy B Baumgartner, Richard Baumgartner, Catherine Duggan, Leslie Bernstein, Anne McTiernan, Rachel Ballard

Open access · greenAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Correlation between an integrative oncology treatment program and survival in patients with advanced gynecological cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

10 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Marian L NeuhouserDivision of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave North, M4B402, Seattle, WA, 98109-1024, USA. mneuhous@fredhutch.org.
Ashley Wilder SmithOutcomes Research Branch, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Stephanie M GeorgeOffice of Disease Prevention, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
James T GibsonInformation Management Services, Inc., Calverton, MD, USA.
Kathy B BaumgartnerDepartment of Epidemiology and Population Health, James Graham Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA.
Richard BaumgartnerDepartment of Epidemiology and Population Health, James Graham Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA.
Catherine DugganDivision of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave North, M4B402, Seattle, WA, 98109-1024, USA.
Leslie BernsteinDivision of Cancer Etiology, Department of Population Sciences, Beckman Research Institute of the City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
Anne McTiernanDivision of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave North, M4B402, Seattle, WA, 98109-1024, USA.
Rachel BallardOffice of Disease Prevention, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Fred Hutch Cancer Center · USUniversity of Louisville · USBeckman Research InstituteInformation Management Services · USNational Cancer Institute · USNational Institutes of Health · USOffice of Disease Prevention · US

Funding

ZIPRASIDONE IN NORMAL HEPATIC FUNCTION SUBJECTS &IN HEPATIC DYSFUCTIN SUBJECTSM01RR000037 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MCDONALD, RUTH C · 1985 to 2007
$33.8M
ZUNI KIDNEY PROJECT STUDY I--POPULATION BASED SURVEY OF RENAL DISEASEM01RR000997 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO · PI ROLDAN, CARLOS A · 1985 to 2010
$30.0M
SURVEILLANCE EPIDEMIOLOGY &END RESULTS PROGRAMN01PC067010 · PC · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI ROSS, RONALD K · 1996 to 2000
$2.4M
SURVEILLANCE, EPIDEMIOLOGY, AND END RESULTSN01CN005228 · CN · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO · PI KEY, CHARLES · 1990 to 1996
–
NCI NIH HHS N01 CN005228NCI NIH HHS N01 PC067010NCRR NIH HHS M01 RR000037NCRR NIH HHS M01 RR000997
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeUse of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is common among breast cancer patients, but less is known about whether CAM influences breast cancer survival.

methodsHealth Eating, Activity, and Lifestyle (HEAL) Study participants (n = 707) were diagnosed with stage I-IIIA breast cancer. Participants completed a 30-month post-diagnosis interview including questions on CAM use (natural products such as dietary and botanical supplements, alternative health practices, and alternative medical systems), weight, physical activity, and comorbidities. Outcomes were breast cancer-specific and total mortality, which were ascertained from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results registries in Western Washington, Los Angeles County, and New Mexico. Cox proportional hazards regression models were fit to data to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for mortality. Models were adjusted for potential confounding by sociodemographic, health, and cancer-related factors.

resultsAmong 707 participants, 70 breast cancer-specific deaths and 149 total deaths were reported. 60.2 % of participants reported CAM use post-diagnosis. The most common CAM were natural products (51 %) including plant-based estrogenic supplements (42 %). Manipulative and body-based practices and alternative medical systems were used by 27 and 13 % of participants, respectively. No associations were observed between CAM use and breast cancer-specific (HR 1.04, 95 % CI 0.61-1.76) or total mortality (HR 0.91, 95 % CI 0.63-1.29).

conclusionComplementary and alternative medicine use was not associated with breast cancer-specific mortality or total mortality. Randomized controlled trials may be needed to definitively test whether there is harm or benefit from the types of CAM assessed in HEAL in relation to mortality outcomes in breast cancer survivors.

Indexed as

Complementary TherapiesAgedBreast NeoplasmsCombined Modality TherapyExerciseFeeding BehaviorFemaleHumansLife StyleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsSEER ProgramTreatment OutcomeBreast cancerCancer survivorshipComplementary and alternative medicineMortality

Identifiers

PMID27766453
PMCPMC5558457
OpenAlexW2538646905

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.