Impact of complementary oral enzyme application on the postoperative treatment results of breast cancer patients - results of an epidemiological multicentre retrolective cohort study
Beuth J.1, Ost B., Pakdaman A., Rethfeldt E., Bock P.R.2, Hanisch J., Schneider B.3
1
Institute for Scientific Evaluation of Naturopathy, University of Cologne, Koln, GermanyCancer Chemother Pharmacol 2001, Vol. 47, Suppl: July 2001, S45 - S54
513 KA (3-00-2)-(20-00-2)
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the impact of postoperative treatment with an oral
enzyme (OE) preparation given complementary to an antineoplastic therapy in
patients with breast cancer.
Methods: The design of this epidemiological study was a retrolective
cohort analysis with parallel groups. Design and conduct of the study were
performed to current standards for prospective, controlled clinical trials. A
cohort of 2339 breast cancer patients undergoing surgical intervention and
radio-, chemo- or hormonal therapy were studied in 216 centres. Of the 2339
patients, 1283 received complementary treatment with OE and 1056 did not receive
OE. Patients with other complementary medications were excluded and the final
analysis was performed with the data from 649 patients, of whom 239 (37%) were
additionally treated with OE (test group) and 410 (63%) without OE (control
group). The median follow-up time for the test group was 485 days and for the
control group 213 days. The primary endpoint of the study was to determine
whether complementary treatment with OE can reduce typical disease- or
therapy-associated signs and symptoms (gastrointestinal symptoms, mental
symptoms, dyspnoea, headache, tumour pain, cachexia, skin disorders, infections,
and side effects associated with the antineoplastic therapy) in patients with
breast cancer. Imbalances for causal effects (covariates) were adjusted for by
means of the propensity score. Outcome analysis was performed by estimating the
linear regression between change in symptom score and propensity score with all
data and using this regression line to calculate the change in symptom score
which would be expected for each patient. Tumour-associated events (recurrence,
metastasis, and death) were evaluated in terms of the number of events observed
and time to event. The safety of treatment with OE was analysed in terms of the
number and severity of adverse events, their duration, treatment and outcome.
Results: For all symptoms except tumour pain, the adjusted mean
improvement in symptom scores was larger in the test group than in the control
group. The adjusted difference was statistically significant for all symptoms,
except tumour pain and infections. The results show that the typical disease-
and therapy-associated signs and symptoms in patients on complementary therapy
with OE during postoperative treatment were significantly less. For 75% of the
test group and 55% of the control group the physician recorded "no signs
and symptoms". A clear reduction in the side effects of radiotherapy and
chemotherapy was documented in 74% of the test group and 55% of the control
group. Analysis of survival, recurrence, and metastasis demonstrated a reduced
number of events in the test group. There was evidence of a beneficial influence
of OE on time to event, although the median observation time was too short in
these breast cancer patients to draw definite conclusions. The safety component
was judged in 98% of the test group and 76% of the control group as "very
good" or "good". In the total sample of 2339 patients, the rate
of OE-associated