Skip to main content

Table 5 Controlled Clinical Studies on VAE Treatment in Breast and Gynaecological Cancer: Reduction of side effects of chemotherapy, radiation or surgery; QoL

From: Viscum album L. extracts in breast and gynaecological cancers: a systematic review of clinical and preclinical research

Site

Stage

Intervention (evaluable patients)

Reduction of side effects of chemotherapy, radiation or surgery

QoL (*during chemotherapy, radiation)

Author, year, reference

   

Outcome

P-value

Measurement scale and outcome

P-value

95% CI

 

Randomized controlled trials

Breast

T1–3, N0–2, M0

CAF, Iscador or Helixor (59)

Neutropenia

15%

0.195

EORTC QLQ-C30* (Pain*, diarrhoea*, role*, insomnia*, nausea/vomiting*)

0.0438 to

0.0003

 

Tröger 2009 [47]

  

CAF (30)

 

27%

        
 

No data

(F)EC, Iscador M (32)

EC-associated inhibition of granulocyte function: no difference.

Reduction of EC-related side effects (nausea, constipation, pain, stomatitis).

Lymphocytes, retching, emesis: no difference

>0.27

EORTC QLQ-C30*, BR 23*, Rhodes Index*: no difference

No data

No data

Büssing 2008 [48]

  

(F)EC (33)

  

"significant"

       
 

T1a-3, N0, M0

Iscador (38)

   

Self-regulation questionnaire,

Hazard-ratio

0.35

 

0.05–0.60

Grossarth 2006a [52, 53]

  

None (38)

          
 

T1–3, N0-N+, M0

CMF, Lektinol 15 ng ML (169)

Haematological parameters, hospitalization, paracetamol, metoclopramid: no difference.

Leucopenia ↓ (trend)

FACT-G*

↑ 4.4

GLQ-8* sum

↓ 28.9

Spitzer uniscale*

↓ 12.2

KPS*

No difference

<0.0001

 

Semiglasov 2006 [54]

  

CMF, placebo (168)

   

FACT-G*

↓ 5.11

GLQ-8* sum

↑ 94.8

Spitzer uniscale*

↑ 10.8

    
 

T1–2, N0–1, M0

CMF, radiation, Helixor A (11)

CMF-induced NK-cell decrease ↓ SCE-increase ↓

other immune markers: no difference

 

0.005

n.s.

EORTC QLQ-C30*

 

No difference, data not shown

not shown

 

Auerbach 2005 [55]

  

CMF, radiation, placebo (9)

          
 

T1–3, N0-N+, M0

CMF, Lektinol 5 ng ML (66)

Haematological parameters, hospitalization, paracetamol, metoclopramid: no difference. immune markerers: CD4, CD4/CD8, NK-cell-activity: significant ↑

  

GLQ-8* sum

No difference

 

Spitzer uniscale*

No data

QLQ C-30*

No difference

<0.05

 

Semiglasov 2004 [57]

  

CMF, Lektinol 15 ng ML (65)

   

GLQ-8* sum

Superior 60,8mm

 

Spitzer uniscale*

Superior 16,4 mm

    
  

CMF, Lektinol 35 ng ML (64)

   

GLQ-8* sum

No difference

 

Spitzer uniscale*

No data

    
  

CMF, placebo (66)

          
 

IIIA–IIIB

Iscador (17)

   

Self-regulation questionnaire (score 1–6)

 

2.92 → 3.7

 

0.13

 

Grossarth 2001a [59]

  

None (17)

     

2.87 → 2.99

    
 

IV

Iscador spezial (20)

   

Spitzer score questionnaire

 

~5 → 7.2

 

<0.05

 

Borrelli 2001 [58]

  

Placebo (10)

     

~5.2 → 4.8

    
 

Advanced

VEC, Eurixor (21)

Leukopenia ↓

Platelets: no difference

 

≤ 0.001

QoL index* (superior)

 

Anxienty scale* (superior)

 

≤ 0.01

 

Heiny 1991 [61]

  

VEC, placebo (19)

          

Breast, others

All stages

Iscador (39)

   

Self-regulation questionnaire

(score 1–6)

 

3.41 → 3.87

 

0.02

 

Grossarth 2001b [59]

  

None (39)

     

3.85 → 3.62

    

Breast, ovary, lung

T1–4, N0–3, M0–1

ChemotherapyI, Helixor A (115)

Chemotherapy-related adverse events

28

not shown

FLIC-score*

↑ 9

TCM-score*

↑ -1

 

KPS* increase in % of patients

50%

FLIC 0.014

TCM 0.0007

KPS 0.002

 

Piao 2004 [56]

  

ChemotherapyI, Lentinan (109)

Chemotherapy-related adverse events

77

 

FLIC-score*

↑ 4,7

TCM-score*

0

 

KPS* increase in % of patients

32%

   

Ovary

IA–IC

Iscador (21)

   

Self-regulation questionnaire, (score 1–6) median difference

 

0.58

0.0002

0.30–0.90

Grossarth 2007a [50]

  

None (21)

          

Ovary, others

Inoperable

Radiation, cisplatin, holoxan, Helixor (23)

Nausea ↓,

vomiting ↓,

depression of leucopoiesis ↓

 

0.005, 0.08,

0.003

KPS*

67% → 76% (p = 0.0008II)

  

not shown

 

Lange 1985 [63]

  

Radiation, cisplatin, holoxan (21)

    

70% → 74% (p = 0.12II)

     

Cervix

IVA-B

Iscador (19)

   

Self-regulation questionnaire, (score 1–6) median difference

0.7

 

0.014

0.15–1.05

Grossarth 2007c [51]

  

None (19)

          

Uterus

IA-C

Iscador (30)

   

Self-regulation questionnaire, (score 1–6) median difference

0.4

 

0.0012

0.15–0.70

Grossarth 2008a [49]

  

None (30)

          

Non-randomized controlled studies

Breast

T1–3, N0, M0

Iscador (84)

   

Self-regulation questionnaire

Hazard-ratio

0.20

 

0.031

0.00–0.35

Grossarth 2006b [52, 53]

  

None (84)

          
 

I–II

Surgery, CMF/EC, Iscador (33)

CMF/EC-induced lymphocyte decrease ↑,

platelet decrease ↓

n.s,

0.01

EORTC QLQ-C30*, BR 23*

Reduced increase of nausea/vomiting, general side effects of CMF/EC

 

0.02

0.02

 

Loewe-Mesch [64]

  

Surgery, CMF/EC (33)

          

Breast (suspected)

 

Surgery, Iscador M spezial (47)

Prevention of surgery-associated inhibition of granulocyte function (PMA- and E.coli-stimulated oxidative burst)

<0.0001,<0.001

      

Büssing 2005 [65]

  

Surgery (51)

          

Ovary

IA–IC

Iscador (75)

   

Self-regulation questionnaire, (score 1–6) median difference

0.30

 

<0.026

0.10–0.60

Grossarth 2007d [50]

  

None (75)

          

Cervix

IB-IVA

Iscador (102)

   

Self-regulation questionnaire, (score 1–6) median difference

0.25

 

<0.0005

0.15–0.35

Grossarth 2007f [51]

  

None (102)

          

Uterus

IA-C

Iscador (103)

   

Self-regulation questionnaire, (score 1–6) median difference

0.65

 

<0.0005

0.4–0.95

Grossarth 2008d [49]

  

None (103)

          

Retrolective pharmaco-epidemiological cohort study

Breast

I–III

Conventional therapy, Helixor (167)

   

Odds ratio for occurrence of disease- or treatment associated symptoms: 0.508

 

0.319–0.811

Beuth 2008 [69]

  

Conventional therapy (514)

          
 

I–III

Conventional therapy, Iscador (710)

Adverse drug reactions ↓, Odds ratio: 0.47

95% CI 0.32–0.67

Odds ratio for being symptom-free 3.56 (vomiting, headache, exhaustion, depression, concentration, sleep, dizziness, irritability) ↑

 

2.03–6.27

Bock 2004 [70]

  

Conventional therapy (732)

          
 

I–IV

Conventional therapy, Eurixor (219)

   

Symptom mean score improved (nausea, appetite, stomach pain, tiredness, depression, concentration, irritability, sleep)

<0.0001

 

Schumacher 2003 [71, 72]

  

Conventional therapy (470)

          
  1. I Chemotherapy (referring to the study by Piao et al.) – breast cancer: CAP, CAF (CAP: Cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, cisplatin; CAF: Cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, 5-fluorouracil); ovarian cancer: CP, IcP (CP: Cyclophosphamide, cisplatin, IcP: Ifosfamid, carboplatin); non-small cell-lung cancer: VP, MViP (VP: Vinorelbine, cisplatin; MViP: Mitomycin, vindesine, cisplatin).
  2. II Statistical significance of pre-post difference within each group
  3. QoL: Quality of life; KPS: Karnofsky Performance Status Scale SCE: Sister chromatid exchange; ↑: increase; ↓: decrease. P-value, 95% CI: Statistical significance of difference between mistletoe (or other verum) and control group; n.s.: not statistically significant; EC: Epirubicin, cyclophosphamide (F: 5-fluorouracil); VEC: Vindesine, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide; CMF: Cyclophosphamide, methotrexate 5-fluorouracil; CAF: Cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, 5-fluorouracil.