No abstract

No abstract

Background Vitamin C, also called ascorbic acid, is a water-soluble antioxidant and free radical scavenger. It is required in the body for numerous metabolic functions and is involved in the development of proteins and connective tissue. Methods In April 2020, a systematic search was carried out on five electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Cinahl, PsycINFO) to find studies on the use, efficacy and safety of a complementary therapy with vitamin C in oncological patients. Results Out of the initial 23,195 search results, 21 studies with 1961 patients were included in this review. Five of the included studies (n = 417) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The remaining 16 studies belonged to a lower class of evidence. The patients who were treated with vitamin C suffered from various malignant diseases, some in an advanced and palliative stage. Vitamin C was applied intravenously or orally. It was either the only treatment or was combined with chemo- or radiotherapy. Endpoints included the development of the disease-related symptoms, quality of life, mortality, progression-free survival and safety of vitamin C. The studies were of moderate quality and showed either no effect of vitamin C or a positive trend, although this has rarely been statistically proven in group comparisons. No or only slight side effects with both oral and intravenous administration of vitamin C were reported. Conclusion Oral intake of vitamin C does not appear to have any effect in patients with malignancies. Data are heterogeneous for intravenous administration. There are no RCTs with statistical group comparisons.

No abstract

Purpose Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is used by about half of all patients with cancer. Guidelines are an important tool to introduce evidence-based medicine into routine cancer care. The aim of our study was to assess methodology of the statements and recommendations concerning CAM. Methods A systematic assessment of all S3 guidelines published until November 2018 was done. Methodology of all statements and recommendations concerning CAM which were declared as evidence-based was evaluated with respect to international standards. According to the AMSTAR-2 instrument search strategy including filters, searched databases, restrictions to the research question and description of the included studies were examined. In case of adaptations from other guidelines, all underlying guidelines were examined as well. Results After examining 212 guidelines, 82 evidence-based statements and recommendations regarding CAM could be identified. Four were derived by adaptation, 78 by a de-novo search. Only 11 of 78 (14%) fulfilled all assessment criteria. In 18 (19%) cases no information on search strategy was attainable in any document affiliated to the guideline, in 35 (45%) cases information on search strategy was superficial and in 54 (78%) cases the referred evidence was not presented in adequate detail. Conclusions Concerning CAM statements and recommendations within S3 guidelines quality of evidence processing has several shortcomings. Guideline adaptions often lack transparency and traceability.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Water therapies as hydrotherapy, balneotherapy or aqua therapy are often used in the relief of disease- and treatment-associated symptoms of cancer patients. Yet, a systematic review for the evidence of water therapy including all cancer entities has not been conducted to date. Purpose Oncological patients often suffer from symptoms which in patients with other diseases are successfully treated with water therapy. We want to gather more information about the benefits and risks of water therapy for cancer patients. Method In May 2020, a systematic search was conducted searching five electronic databases (Embase, Cochrane, PsychInfo, CINAHL and PubMed) to find studies concerning the use, effectiveness and potential harm of water therapy on cancer patients. Results Of 3165 search results, 10 publications concerning 12 studies with 430 patients were included in this systematic review. The patients treated with water therapy were mainly diagnosed with breast cancer. The therapy concepts included aqua lymphatic therapy, aquatic exercises, foot bathes and whole-body bathes. Outcomes were state of lymphedema, quality of life, fatigue, BMI, vital parameters, anxiety and pain. The quality of the studies was assessed with the AMSTAR2-instrument, the SIGN-checklist and the IHE-Instruments. The studies had moderate quality and reported heterogeneous results. Some studies reported significantly improved quality of life, extent of lymphedema, neck and shoulder pain, fatigue and BMI while other studies did not find any changes concerning these endpoints. Conclusion Due to the very heterogeneous results and methodical limitations of the included studies, a clear statement regarding the effectiveness of water therapy on cancer patients is not possible.