ArticleCancers2022
Evaluation of Concomitant Use of Anticancer Drugs and Herbal Products: From Interactions to Synergic Activity.
Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Physician Partnerships and Adverse Outcomes among Breast Cancer Survivors: The Role of Adherence to Adjuvant Hormone Therapy.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Integrative multidisciplinary oncological approach in cancer patients receiving oncological treatments: a case series.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- An innovative approach to development of new pyrazolylquinolin-2-one hybrids as dual EGFR and BRAFMolecular diversity · 2025Article
- When Nature Meets Oncology: Unraveling Herb-Drug Interactions in Cancer Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Bridging the gap: attitudes and practices toward complementary and alternative medicine among oncology patients and healthcare professionals in Croatia.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Article
- Friedelin: Structure, Biosynthesis, Extraction, and Its Potential Health Impact.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Glutathione: Lights and Shadows in Cancer Patients.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Anti-Cancer Potential of Edible/Medicinal Mushrooms in Breast Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- The Use of Herbal Medicine and Dietary Supplements in Cancer Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.Integrative cancer therapiesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
CAM is used by about 40% of cancer patients in Western Countries, with peaks of 80% for breast cancer patients. Cancer patients use CAM to boost immune function, to control cancer symptoms and treatment-related side effects, and to improve health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) and survival. Unfortunately, self-prescription of natural remedies in cancer patients can lead to unexpected toxicities and can reduce the effectiveness of cancer therapy. Although CAM usually refers to all the "natural or organic" products/methods that are generally considered less toxic, there are concerns about drug interactions, especially in patients participating in clinical trials with experimental agents. Despite the claims of the promising and potential benefits made by prescribers, many CAMs lack clear scientific evidence of their safety and efficacy. Given the widespread use of CAM-both clearly declared and overt-in this review, we focused on the most important known data on the risk of interactions between biologics and oncology drugs with the goal of opening up CAM in accordance with the meaning of integrative medicine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.