Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30911084›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Complementary medicine use during cancer treatment and potential herb-drug interactions from a cross-sectional study in an academic centre.

Mégane Jermini, Julie Dubois, Pierre-Yves Rodondi, Khalil Zaman, Thierry Buclin, Chantal Csajka, Angela Orcurto, Laura E Rothuizen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

60 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Use of dietary supplements and over-the-counter products among adults with a self-reported history of cancer in Poland.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Cancer and Traditional Medicine: An Integrative Approach.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Mégane JerminiPharmacy Service, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Julie DuboisCenter for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Pierre-Yves RodondiCenter for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. pierre-yves.rodondi@unifr.ch.ORCID 0000-0003-2007-2995
Khalil ZamanDepartment of Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Thierry BuclinClinical Pharmacology, Department of Laboratories, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Chantal CsajkaClinical Pharmacology, Department of Laboratories, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Angela OrcurtoDepartment of Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Laura E RothuizenClinical Pharmacology, Department of Laboratories, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Complementary medicine (CM) is used by one third to one half of cancer patients throughout the world. The objective of this study was to describe the prevalence of CM use and the potential for interactions with cancer treatments in an academic oncology centre. A cross-sectional study was conducted among patients undergoing current cancer treatment. Among 132 included patients, 56% had used CM since their cancer diagnosis and 45% were using CM during cancer treatment at the time of the survey. The main CM used were green tea (35%), herbal tea (35%), homeopathy (27%), dietary supplements (27%), and herbal medicines (27%). A small majority of patients (58%) spontaneously mentioned the use of CM to their oncologist. Of 42 identified combinations of concomitant use of biologically based CM and anticancer agents among the study patients, the potential for pharmacokinetic interactions of clinical relevance was not expected in 17 combinations (40%), hypothetical and deemed unlikely in 23 (55%), and of probable low clinical relevance in 2 (5%). Considering the high prevalence of CM use, active enquiries should be made by healthcare professionals to detect symptoms that may relate to CM tolerance and effects or that suggest interactions between CM and cancer treatments.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic AgentsComplementary TherapiesCross-Sectional StudiesDietary SupplementsFemaleHerb-Drug InteractionsHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPlants, MedicinalTeaYoung AdultAntineoplastic AgentsTea

Identifiers

PMID30911084
PMCPMC6434040

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.