ArticleExploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy2025
The prevalence of clinically relevant herb-drug interactions between herbal products and anti-cancer therapy in older adults with cancer - A cross-sectional study.
Article in Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chinese Medicine Reduces Treatment Failure in Elderly Patients with Severe Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Post-Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.Chinese journal of integrative medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Complementary and alternative medicine use among elderly cancer patients: a cross-sectional study in South Korea.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) Use among Elderly Cancer Patients: A cross-sectional study in South Korea.Research square · 2025Article
- The prevalence and predictors of herb-drug interactions among Iranian cancer patients during chemotherapy courses.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The use of herbal supplements is highly prevalent amongst people with cancer and may lead to clinically relevant herb-drug interactions (HDIs) with their anti-cancer treatment. As the number of older adults with cancer increases, the numbers of older adults with cancer that are at risk of a HDI with anti-cancer treatment increases as well. Objective: The goal of this study was to establish the prevalence of potentially relevant HDIs in older adults who undergo anti-cancer treatment. Also, the overall use of herbal products in this population and possible associations with patient characteristics were investigated. Method: In this single center cross-sectional study patients aged ≥65 years were invited to participate if they underwent systemic anticancer treatment for a solid or hematological cancer. A questionnaire was developed to investigate the use of a selected set of frequently used herbs with known HDIs with regular medications. If a selected herb was used, the herb and oncological medication were assessed for potentially relevant HDIs. All potentially relevant HDIs were independently evaluated by two pharmacists on clinical relevance. Results: A total of 202 patients were included in the analysis. The mean age was 74 years and 54 % was male. The prevalence of potentially relevant HDIs was 4 % and overall herb use was 12 %. Thirteen potentially relevant HDIs were identified, of which 6 were judged to be clinically relevant. The clinically relevant HDIs concerned red yeast rice, red coneflower, turmeric, and cannabis. None of the patient characteristics were associated with overall herb use. Conclusion: Potentially relevant HDIs between herbal supplements and oncological treatment occur in 4 % of older adults with cancer and half of these are clinically relevant. Healthcare providers should question patients with cancer on the use of herbal supplements and monitor for relevant HDI with the treatment given.
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.