J Korean Med Assoc.  2008 May;51(5):403-410. 10.5124/jkma.2008.51.5.403.

Evidence-based Assessment of Complementary and Alternative Therapies for Cancer

• Kim SY

• KMID: 2185867
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5124/jkma.2008.51.5.403

Abstract

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is a group of diverse medical and health care systems, practices, and products that are not currently considered to be the parts of conventional medicine. Many patients suffering from cancer use CAM therapies. Physicians, patients, and policy makers need information on current evidence on the efficacy and safety of selected CAM therapies that are commonly used by patients with cancer. The commonly used CAM therapies among cancer patients were assessed by systematic reviews of surveys on Korean cancer patients' use of CAM. A total of 82 CAM interventions were selected for assessment of the effectiveness and safety. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Korean database (KoreaMed, KMbase), Japan and China database in most sensitive modes. We adopted methodologies of classification of study design, study quality assessment, and determination of evidence levels from Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) and National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). Safety of each CAM intervention was assessed according to the level of risk grading. External reviews were done by multidisciplinary experts.

Keyword

Complementary and alternative medicine; Assessment; Evidence-based medicine; Methodology

MeSH Terms

Administrative Personnel
China
Complementary Therapies
Delivery of Health Care
Evidence-Based Medicine
Humans
Japan
Stress, Psychological

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Algorithm for classifying primary study designs about effectiveness.

Reference

1. The Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in the United States. National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM). Available from: http://nccam.nih.gov/news/camsurvey_fs1.htm.

2. Korean Academy of Medical Sciences. Development for complementary and alternative therapies assessment methodology and its application. 2005.

3. Eisenberg DM, Davis RB, Ettner SL, Appel S, Wilkey S, Van Rompay M, Kessler RC. Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990-1997: results of a follow-up national survey. JAMA. 1998. 280:1569–1575.

4. Tascilar M, de Jong FA, Verweij J, Mathijssen RH. Complementary and alternative medicine during cancer treatment: beyond innocence. Oncologist. 2006. 11:732–741.

5. Ernst E, Cassileth BR. The prevalence of complementary/alternative medicine in cancer: a systematic review. Cancer. 1998. 83:777–782.

6. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, Guyatt GH, Harbour RT, Haugh MC, Henry D, Hill S, Jaeschke R, Leng G, Liberati A, Magrini N, Mason J, Middleton P, Mrukowicz J, O'Connell D, Oxman AD, Phillips B, Schü-nemann HJ, Edejer TT, Varonen H, Vist GE, Williams JW Jr, Zaza S. GRADE Working Group. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004. 328:1490.

7. Public health guidance process and method guides. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Available from http://www.nice.org.uk/aboutnice/howwework/developingnicepublichealthguidance/publichealthguidanceprocessandmethodguides/public_health_guidance_process_and_method_guides.jsp.

8. Systems to Rate the Strength Of Scientific Evidence. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Available from http://www.thecre.com/pdf/ahrq-system-strength.pdf.

9. Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J. Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg. 2003. 73:712–716.