Journal Home
Search for

Volume 1, Issue 4, Pages 181-182 (December 2009)


View previous. 82 of 169 View next.

Complementary and alternative medicine in lung cancer patients

O. Mickea, J. Büntzelab, R. Mückeabc

Introduction

The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is the norm in tumor patients (Burstein, JCO 2000). CAM is most frequently used in breast and prostate cancer patients. The CAM use in lung cancer patients is widely neglected, and systematic studies are scarce in this field.

Therefore, the German Working Group Trace Elements and Electrolytes in Radiation Oncology, AKTE, initiated a study on the use of CAM in lung cancer patients in addition to radiation treatment.

Methods

A total of 120 patients (38 f, 72m) of 3 institutions were interviewed by a standardized questionnaire. Besides the tumor parameters and the use of CAM, the reason for the use, information on the receipt of the medication, the information sources and the subjective condition of the patient.

Results

Altogether, 54% of the patients reported to use CAM (66% of female patients, 52% of male patients). The CAM measures, most frequent used, were: vitamin combinations (17%), mistletoe (15%), selenium (12%), other trace element combinations (8%), prayer (6%), thymus preparations (5%), homeopathy (3%) and other physical treatment (3%). A total of 52% reported the wish to support the tumor treatment as a reason to use CAM and 27% better feeling using CAM. 50% of CAM was bought by patients themselves and 50% were prescribed by their family physicians. Sources of CAM supply predominantly were pharmacies and drugstores. Information sources mostly were the family physician and other patients. 55% of patients described an improvement of their subjective condition.

Conclusions

The use of CAM is a frequent phenomenon in lung cancer patients. Our results suggest that it is very important to obtain information on the CAM use in lung cancer patients and, particularly in controlled clinical trials, to prospectively document it.

No full text is available. To read the body of this article, please view the PDF online.

a Franziskus Hospital, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Bielefeld, Germany

b Südharz Hospital, Otolarynglogy, Nordhausen, Germany

c Lippe Hospital Lemgo, Radiotherapy, Lemgo, Germany

PII: S1876-3820(09)00059-6

doi:10.1016/j.eujim.2009.08.078


View previous. 82 of 169 View next.