Statement to an Insufficient Systematic Review on Viscum album L. Therapy

Harald Matthes; Anja Thronicke; Ralf-Dieter Hofheinz; Erik Baars; David Martin; Roman Huber; Thomas Breitkreuz; Gil Bar-Sela; Daniel Galun; Friedemann Schad

doi:10.1155/2020/7091039

Statement to an Insufficient Systematic Review on Viscum album L. Therapy

Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2020 Feb 18:2020:7091039. doi: 10.1155/2020/7091039. eCollection 2020.

Authors

Harald Matthes^{1

2

3}, Anja Thronicke³, Ralf-Dieter Hofheinz⁴, Erik Baars⁵, David Martin⁶, Roman Huber⁷, Thomas Breitkreuz^{8

9}, Gil Bar-Sela¹⁰, Daniel Galun¹¹, Friedemann Schad^{1

3

12}

Affiliations

¹ Oncological Centre, Hospital Gemeinschaftskrankenhaus Havelhöhe, Berlin, Germany.
² Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics and Medical Department of Gastroenterology, Infectiology and Rheumatology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany.
³ Research Institute Havelhöhe, Hospital Gemeinschaftskrankenhaus Havelhöhe, Berlin, Germany.
⁴ Interdisciplinary Tumour Centre Mannheim, University Medicine of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
⁵ Louis Bolk Institute, Bunnik, Netherlands.
⁶ Gerhard Kienle Chair for Medical Theory, Integrative and Anthroposophical Medicine, Department of Human Medicine, Faculty of Health, University of Witten/Herdecke, Witten/Herdecke, Germany.
⁷ Center for Complementary Medicine, Institute for Infection, Prevention and Hospital Epidemiology, University Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
⁸ Hospital Filderklinik, Stuttgart, Germany.
⁹ Hospital Paracelsus Krankenhaus, Bad Liebenzell, Germany.
¹⁰ Emek Medical Center, Afula, Israel.
¹¹ Clinical Center of Serbia, Belgrade and Medical School, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
¹² Interdisciplinary Oncology and Palliative Care, Hospital Gemeinschaftskrankenhaus Havelhöhe, Berlin, Germany.

Abstract

Background: Up to 88% of oncological patients apply complementary therapies and up to 77% apply complementary mistletoe therapy in the context of integrative oncological approaches. An evidence-based consultation of oncological health professionals regarding complementary therapies used in Germany is missing. Therefore, a new S3-Guideline for Complementary Medicine in the Treatment of Oncological Patients is under development and is anticipated to be finalized in November 2020. It will be based on evidence-based publications and systematic reviews on complementary therapies in oncology. A recently published two-part systematic review on mistletoe treatment in oncology has been reevaluated.

Methods: The latest published systematic two-part review on mistletoe has been systematically proofread and checked in compliance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention and the AMSTAR 2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) tool.

Results: The here discussed two-part review is incomplete, lacks sound accuracy including insufficient assessment of the risk of bias, and contains imprecise statements. In addition, it does not sufficiently comply with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention and the AMSTAR 2 tool.

Conclusion: In view of the approaching release of a new guideline in the field of complementary therapies in oncology, the present statement draws attention to a lack of profound methodology of conductance of a recently released systematic review on mistletoe. In consequence, a comprehensive overview of published mistletoe studies, i.e., a meta-analysis with a sound methodology of conductance, is necessary.