Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Purpose. Although Shi Quan Da Bu Tang (SQDBT) has been used to treat cancer patients clinically, very few studies evaluating the effectiveness of SQDBT using objective indicators have been published. The study objectives were to examine the effectiveness of SQDBT for alleviating hematotoxicity, as indicated by white blood cell (WBC) counts and hemoglobin (Hb) levels, among patients with breast carcinoma receiving chemotherapy. Methods. The authors identified patients with breast carcinoma who received chemotherapy in a teaching hospital in Taipei in 2008 through a chart review process. Only patients with initial WBC counts of <4000/µL were included. The case group was composed of 47 chemotherapy courses treated with SQDBT, whereas the comparison group included 257 courses without SQDBT. The complete blood count test was done before start of a chemotherapy course and 1 week after chemotherapeutic drugs were given. Results. Age, cancer stage, cancer status, use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, and chemotherapy drugs were controlled in the model. Patients who took SQDBT had significantly increased WBC counts, especially neutrophils, and Hb after chemotherapy (adjusted β = 1202.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 440.45-1964.57 for WBC; β = 834.83, 95% CI = 197.35-1472.31 for neutrophils; β = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.05-0.63 for Hb). There were no significant differences in tumor markers CEA and CA153 between patients given SQDBT or not after chemotherapy. Conclusion. SQDBT is effective in alleviating hematotoxicity among patients with breast carcinoma receiving chemotherapy, without affecting the presentation of tumor markers in the short term. More study is needed to determine long-term outcomes such as recurrence and survival.

Keywords

Shi Quan Da Bu Tang herbal formula chemotherapy hematotoxicity breast carcinoma

Introduction

Of all cancers among women in Taiwan, breast carcinoma is ranked fourth in incidence and mortality. The incidence and mortality was 49.9 per 100 000 women in 2006 and 10.6 per 100 000 women in 2009, respectively.¹ Although these rates are lower than in the United States, yet a trend toward increased incidence and mortality of breast carcinoma is reported in Taiwan.^1,2 Most patients with breast carcinoma need to receive chemotherapy for relapse prevention. They often encounter complications from chemotherapy, including hematotoxicity.^3,4 Studies showed that the incidence of grade 3 to 4 hematotoxicity was 25% to 57% for leukopenia, 5% to 28% for anemia, and 5% to 20% for thrombocytopenia.^3-6 Hematotoxicity has been shown to interfere with the completion of chemotherapy and to cause fatigue and weakness among patients.^4,7

In Taiwan, the National Health Insurance system covers both modern medicine and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) expenses in parallel. More than 70 Western medical hospitals have departments of TCM. It is feasible to treat cancer with an integrative system of modern medicine and TCM. Recent surveys of cancer patients suggested that 9% to 64% patients tried some form of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM).^8-13 The classic TCM herbal formula, Shi Quan Da Bu Tang (SQDBT, also known as Juzen-taiho-to, or TJ-48) is a therapeutic formula consisting of 10 different herbs to tonify blood and qi. Studies showed that SQDBT increases white blood cell (WBC) count and hemoglobin (Hb) level.^14-17 Some animal studies showed that SQDBT prevented malignant progression and metastasis of tumor cells.^15,18,19

To the best of our knowledge, few studies evaluated the effectiveness of TCM among cancer patients using objective indicators and no study examined the effect of SQDBT for alleviating hematotoxicity among human subjects receiving chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of SQDBT for alleviating hematotoxicity, as indicated by WBC counts and Hb levels, among patients with breast carcinoma receiving chemotherapy.

Materials and Methods

We reviewed the electronic medical charts of patients with breast carcinoma receiving chemotherapy at a university hospital in Taipei City from January to December 2008. The study hospital offered both TCM and Western oncology services. There was no gate-keeping system or formal referral criteria for medical treatment. This study involved no contact with the patients; the patient names were replaced by coded numbers to ensure anonymity during and after data abstraction was completed. Written consent was not required, since patient identifiers were not included in the data. The study was approved by the human subjects committee at the study hospital (approval number TMUH-02-10-02).

Study Participants

Through the electronic chart system, we identified 80 adult patients with breast carcinoma who received chemotherapy in 2008. A total of 823 chemotherapy courses among the 80 patients were identified. Since our research focused on use of SQDBT to treat leukopenia, we excluded patients with WBC counts of ≥4000/µL when SQDBT was started. Patients with chemotherapy courses who did not follow the usual 3-week cycle were also excluded. Finally, the study included 304 chemotherapy courses among 68 patients. Of the 304 courses of chemotherapy, 47 courses among 13 patients included treatment with SQDBT, which comprised the case group, whereas the remaining 257 courses among 66 patients without SQDBT comprised the comparison group. There were 11 patients who were in both the case and the comparison groups. The unit of analysis was one course of chemotherapy.

Chemotherapy Protocol

The type and dosage of chemotherapy drugs were decided by the oncologists in the Division of Hematology and Oncology. The oncologists had undergone training for more than 6 years in the Department of Internal Medicine and were certified by the Taiwan Oncology Society. Usually, patients with breast carcinoma received 3-week cyclic chemotherapy courses. According to the hospital routine, The complete blood count test was done before start of the first chemotherapy course (before CT), and then chemotherapy drugs were administered later at the same day, after complete blood count test results were assessed by the oncologists. The complete blood count test was done again 1 week after chemotherapy drugs were given (after CT). Tumor markers CEA and CA153 were assessed every 3 month. The blood-testing instrument was calibrated daily by qualified technicians at the study hospital.

Shi Quan Da Bu Tang Protocol

Patients were referred by their oncologist or were self-referred for TCM services. The TCM doctors assessed symptoms and the blood-testing data of the patient. If the patient had general weakness and fatigue, and combined leukopenia, neutropenia, or anemia, then SQDBT was prescribed. SQDBT is a traditional multicomponent medication. The dosage of each herb of the SQDBT was based on the Committee on Chinese Medicine and Pharmacy, Taiwan Department of Health.²⁰ The SQDBT used in this study was in the form of a pill produced by a GMP-certified pharmaceutical company in Taiwan (Ko Da Pharmaceutical Co, Ltd, Taoyuan, Taiwan). This company obtained ISO9001 certification in 2000. Each pill weighed 500 mg and was composed of Poria (36 mg), Rhizoma atractylodis macrocephalae (36 mg), Radix ginseng (36 mg), Radix rehmanniae preparata (36 mg), Radix paeoniae alba (36 mg), Radix glycyrrhizae (36 mg), Radix astragali (36 mg), Cortex cinnamomi (12 mg), Radix angelicae sinensis (36 mg), Rhizoma chuanxiong (36 mg), and Mel (164 mg). Each herb except Mel was cleaned, dried, and ground into powder separately. Then the component powder was mixed together in the ratio listed above. Finally, Mel was mixed with the powder to form a pill. To ensure the quality of the product, thin layer chromatography was performed on sample pills to ensure the existence of each component individually. For example, according to the manufacturer, to detect Radix ginseng of the SQDBT, SQDBT was diluted in methanol. Then SQDBT solution was filtered and analyzed using thin layer chromatography and compared the results with controls (filtered solution of Radix ginseng and filtered solution of SQDBT without Radix ginseng) to confirm the existence of Radix ginseng in the SQDBT. Chemical pattern of SQDBT obtained by the 3-dimensional high-performance liquid chromatography analysis is given in Figure 1. SQDBT was prescribed at a dose of 6 to 10 pills a time, 3 times a day after meals. Based on the consensus of the TCM doctors, the prescribed dose was based on the patient’s WBC count, with 10 pills for WBCs < 2000/µL, 8 pills for <3000/µL, and 6 pills for <4000/µL. No adverse effects have been recorded for SQDBT, but based on our clinical observation; some patients may have oral ulcers or insomnia, which could be caused by chemotherapy drugs and/or SQDBT. The TCM doctors decreased the prescribed dose (but no less than 6 pills) if the patient had oral ulcers and/or insomnia. Studies showed that the effect of SQDBT in increasing WBC and Hb was not evident until 14 days after initiation of use.^21,22 Therefore, it was decided to set the start time of SQDBT at 14 days before start of the next course of chemotherapy. Since the chemotherapy courses were cyclical, 14 days before start of the next course of chemotherapy was 1 week after the start of the previous chemotherapy course. Taken together, the SQDBT, chemotherapy, and blood-testing schedule had an integrated course schedule that started with SQDBT for 14 days, then prechemotherapy blood testing was done and chemotherapy was given later the same day. Then, postchemotherapy blood testing was done 1 week later. After 2 weeks, another course of chemotherapy began. Therefore, the integrated course of SQDBT use was 21 days in length. The TCM doctor reassessed the patients at the end of each SQDBT course and decided whether or not to continue the SQDBT therapy.

Figure 1.

Chemical profile of SQDBT analyzed by 3-dimensional HPLC. Each peak of SQDBT in the HPLC profile was identified by comparison of the retention times and VB spectra of chemically defined standard compounds. HPLC condition was as follows: column, Mightysil RP-18, GP 250 × 4.6 mm (5 µm); carrier A, acetonitrile; carrier B, 0.03% H₃PO₄; gradient, 0% to 60% carrier A linear in 65 minutes, 40% to 100% carrier B linear in 65 minutes; flow rate, 1.0 mL/min; injection volume, 10 µL; detector, Hitachi D-7000 interface, L-7100 pump, L-7455 diode array detector, L-7200 autosampler

Measurements

A structured questionnaire was used to abstract data from the medical charts. The data included demographics (age and disease history), disease and treatment information (cancer stage and cancer status, chemotherapeutic drugs, chemotherapy course, use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [GCSF], and use of SQDBT), and blood test results (WBC counts, Hb, CEA, and CA153) before and after chemotherapy. The hematologic toxicity of chemotherapeutic drugs was determined based on the National Cancer Institute–Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3.0.²³

Data Analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using Predictive Analytics Suite Workstation, version 18.0, software (IBM Corp, Somers, NY). Individual variables were examined using percentages, means, and standard deviations. Differences between the case and comparison groups were explored using χ² statistics, Student’s t tests, and one-way analysis of variance. The generalized estimating equations (GEE) model was used to analyze the independent effect of SQDBT on alleviating hematotoxicity, as indicated by the WBC and Hb levels, given potential confounders were adjusted in the model. The GEE approach accounted for correlated data resulting from multiple observations of the same individual at different time points.²⁴ In all analyses, a 5% significance level was used.

Results

Characteristics by the Case–Comparison Status

We compared patient characteristics by case–comparison group status (Table 1). There were no significant differences between the case and comparison groups for mean age and cancer status. The comparison group had a greater number of patients with stage III and IV cancers than the case group (63.0% vs 34.1%). All patients used chemotherapeutic drugs with hematotoxicity. There were no significant differences between the case and comparison groups in use of chemotherapeutic drugs except that epirubicin and docetaxel were used more often in the comparison group.

Table 1.

Characteristics by the Case–Comparison Group Status (n = 304)

Characteristic	Case (n = 47); n (%)	Comparison (n = 257); n (%)	t/χ²^a	P
Age in years (mean ± SD)	55.95 ± 8.13	53.67 ± 7.90	−1.81	.071
Cancer status			3.40	.065
Newly diagnosed	37 (78.7)	167 (65.0)
Relapse	10 (21.3)	90 (35.0)
Cancer stage			23.29	<.001
I	13 (27.7)	22 (8.6)
II	18 (38.3)	73 (28.4)
III	2 (4.3)	71 (27.6)
IV	14 (29.8)	91 (35.4)
Hematotoxicity drugs^b
Cyclophosphamide	37 (78.7)	199 (77.4)	0.04	.845
5-Fluorouracil	28 (59.6)	150 (58.4)	0.02	.877
Epirubicin	16 (34.0)	152 (59.1)	10.13	.001
Doxorubicin	9 (19.1)	40 (15.6)	0.38	.539
Docetaxel	13 (27.7)	138 (53.7)	10.78	.001
GCSF
Before SQDBT use
Yes	18 (38.3)	126 (49.0)	1.84	.176
No	29 (61.7)	131 (51.0)
After SQDBT use
Yes	15 (31.9)	124 (48.2)	4.27	.039
No	32 (68.1)	133 (51.8)
White blood cells; mean ± SD
Start SQDBT	2271.91 ± 842.70	2303.81 ± 930.14	0.22	.827
Before CT	3754.47 ± 2294.51	4658.60 ± 2212.77	2.56	.011
After CT	3165.53 ± 1369.05	2436.97 ± 1320.11	−3.46	.001
Neutrophils; mean ± SD
Start SQDBT	1197.24 ± 592.85	1245.43 ± 749.63	0.48	.633
Before CT	2302.68 ± 1890.28	2873.18 ± 1909.47	1.85	.066
After CT	2002.87 ± 1232.09	1373.99 ± 1045.88	−3.64	<.001
Hemoglobin; mean ± SD
Start SQDBT	10.88 ± 1.82	10.92 ± 1.37	0.17	.869
Before CT	11.13 ± 1.88	11.21 ± 1.37	0.30	.768
After CT	11.16 ± 1.79	10.85 ± 1.40	−1.13	.265

Abbreviations: SQDBT, Shi Quan Da Bu Tang; GCSF, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor; CT, chemotherapy.

t and χ² are respective statistical values from Student’s t test and χ² test. The significance level was set to P < .05.

All patients used chemotherapeutic drugs with hematotoxicity.

White Blood Cell Counts

There were no significant differences in mean WBC counts between the case and comparison groups at the time of SQDBT start (Table 1). The case group had lower mean WBC and neutrophil counts than the comparison group before chemotherapy (3754.47/µL vs 4658.60/µL, P = .011 for WBCs; 2302.68 vs 2873.18, P = .066 for neutrophils). One week after chemotherapy, the case group had significantly higher WBC and neutrophil counts than the comparison group (3165.53/µL vs 2436.97 µL, P = .001 for WBCs; 2002.87 vs 1373.99, P < .001 for neutrophils; Table 1). In terms of grades of hematotoxicity, the case group had higher incidences of grades 3 to 4 leukopenia and neutropenia before chemotherapy (17.0% vs 2.3% for leukopenia; 17.6% vs 5.3% for neutropenia), but the case group had lower incidences of grades 3 to 4 leukopenia and neutropenia after chemotherapy (14.9% vs 44.0% for leukopenia; 19.6% vs 44.8% for neutropenia; Table 2). These results were sustained regardless of whether or not GCSF was used (Table 2).

Table 2.

Grades of Hematotoxicity Before and After Chemotherapy by Case–Comparison Status and Use of GCSF (n = 304)^a

	Total (n = 304)						Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor: No (n = 165)						Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor: Yes (n = 139)
	Case		Control				Case		Control				Case		Control
	n	%	n	%	χ²	P	n	%	n	%	χ²	P	n	%	n	%	χ²	P
Before chemotherapy
Leukopenia
Grade 1	26	55.3	210	81.7	25.24	<.001	17	53.1	95	71.4	6.58	.037	9	60.0	115	92.7	28.92	<.001
Grade 2	13	27.7	41	16.0			10	31.3	32	24.1			3	20.0	9	7.3
Grade 3	8	17.0	6	2.3			5	15.6	6	4.5			3	20.0	0	0.0
Grade 4	0	0.0	0	0.0			0	0.0	0	0.0			0	0.0	0	0.0
Neutropenia^b
Grade 1	25	55.6	197	80.1	14.63	.002	16	53.3	85	68.5	5.05	.169	9	60.0	112	91.8	13.27	.001
Grade 2	12	26.7	37	14.6			8	26.7	30	24.2			4	26.7	6	4.9
Grade 3	7	15.6	11	4.5			5	16.7	7	5.6			2	13.3	4	3.3
Grade 4	1	2.0	2	0.8			1	3.3	2	1.6			0	0.0	0	0.0
Anemia
Grade 1	34	72.3	212	82.5	8.57	.014	24	75.0	109	82.0	8.11	.017	10	66.7	103	83.1	2.77	.251
Grade 2	10	21.3	43	16.7			5	15.6	23	17.3			5	33.3	20	16.1
Grade 3	3	6.4	2	0.8			3	9.4	1	0.8			0	0.0	1	0.8
Grade 4	0	0.0	0	0.0			0	0.0	0	0.0			0	0.0	0	0.0
After chemotherapy
Leukopenia
Grade 1	22	46.8	74	28.8	15.36	.002	14	43.8	71	53.4	2.53	.469	8	53.3	3	2.4	49.95	<.001
Grade 2	18	38.3	70	27.2			14	43.8	40	30.1			4	26.7	30	24.2
Grade 3	7	14.9	82	31.9			4	12.5	20	15.0			3	20.0	62	50.0
Grade 4	0	0.0	31	12.1			0	0.0	2	1.5			0	0.0	29	23.4
Neutropenia^c
Grade 1	26	56.5	78	32.6	15.12	.002	17	54.8	68	58.6	0.93	.819	9	60.0	10	8.1	31.97	<.001
Grade 2	11	23.9	54	22.6			9	29.0	27	23.3			2	13.3	27	22.0
Grade 3	9	19.6	64	26.8			5	16.1	19	16.4			4	26.7	45	36.6
Grade 4	0	0.0	43	18.0			0	0.0	2	1.7			0	0.0	41	33.3
Anemia
Grade 1	36	76.6	188	73.2	5.33	.149	24	75.0	108	81.2	9.72	.021	12	80.0	80	64.5	1.57	.456
Grade 2	8	17.0	65	25.3			5	15.6	24	18.0			3	20.0	41	33.1
Grade 3	2	4.3	3	1.2			2	6.3	0	0.0			0	0.0	3	2.4
Grade 4	1	2.1	1	0.4			1	3.1	1	0.8			0	0.0	0	0.0

χ² is the respective statistical value from the χ² test; the significance level was set at P < .05.

Missing data = 13.

Missing data = 19.

The GEE results showed that patients who had concomitant SQDBT with chemotherapy had significantly increased WBC and neutrophil counts after chemotherapy compared with the comparison group (β = 1202.51, P = .002 for WBCs; β = 834.83, P = .010 for neutrophils) given that age, cancer stage, cancer status, and chemotherapeutic drugs were controlled in the model (Table 3).

Table 3.

GEE Results of the Effect of SQDBT on WBC, Neutrophil, and Hb Level Given Age, Cancer Stage, Cancer Status, and Chemotherapeutic Drugs Were Controlled in the Model^a

		WBC				Neutrophil				Hb Level
		95% CI				95% CI				95% CI
	Estimate	Lower	Upper	P	Estimate	Lower	Upper	P	Estimate	Lower	Upper	P
Intercept	2672.37	1110.87	4233.86	.001	1418.63	78.15	2759.11	.038	11.16	10.04	12.29	<.001
SQDBT cases	−714.40	−1571.01	142.22	.102	−344.99	−1065.61	375.627	.348	−0.52	−1.10	0.06	.077
GCSF	1162.60	586.49	1738.71	<.001	1001.94	488.73	1515.15	<.001	−0.40	−0.73	−0.07	.018
After CT	−950.91	−1246.57	−655.26	<.001	−440.06	−708.74	−171.39	<.001	−0.21	−0.32	−0.10	<.001
SQDBT case × GCSF	291.59	−598.15	1181.33	.521	238.02	−580.67	1056.70	.569	−0.20	−0.96	0.57	.620
SQDBT case × after CT	1202.51	440.45	1964.57	.002	834.83	197.35	1472.31	.010	0.34	0.05	0.63	.021
GCSF × after CT	−2633.68	−3153.96	−2113.39	<.001	−2114.97	−2558.93	−1671.02	<.001	−0.33	−0.49	−0.16	<.001

Abbreviations: GEE, generalized estimating equations; SQDBT: Shi Quan Da Bu Tang; WBC, white blood cell; Hb, hemoglobin; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; GCSF, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor; CT, chemotherapy; ×, interaction.

The references were comparison status, no use of GCSF, and before CT. The significance level was set to P < .05.

Hemoglobin Level

The mean Hb level did not differ significantly between the case and comparison groups before or after chemotherapy (Table 1). Before chemotherapy, the case group had higher incidences of grades 2 to 4 anemia than the comparison group (27.7% vs 17.5%, P = .014), but there were no significant differences in the incidences of grades 2 to 4 anemia after chemotherapy (Table 2).

The GEE results showed that patients who had concomitant SQDBT with chemotherapy had significantly increased Hb levels after chemotherapy compared with the comparison group (β = 0.34, P = .021), given that age, cancer stage, cancer status, and chemotherapeutic drugs were controlled in the model (Table 3).

Tumor Markers

We further examined whether tumor markers, CEA and CA153, differed between the case and comparison groups after chemotherapy to address the concern that SQDBT may interfere with the effect of chemotherapy. Given that age, cancer stage, cancer status, GCSF, and chemotherapy drugs were controlled for in the model, the GEE results showed that CEA and CA153 did not differ in patients who had concomitant SQDBT with chemotherapy as compared with the comparison group (β = −4.09, P = .574 for CEA; β = −1.21, P = .917 for CA153; Table 4).

Table 4.

GEE Results of the Effect of SQDBT on CEA and CA153 Given Age, Cancer Stage, Cancer Status, and Chemotherapeutic Drugs Were Controlled in the Model^a

		CEA				CA153
		95% CI				95% CI
	Estimate	Lower	Upper	P	Estimate	Lower	Upper	P
Intercept	46.69	17.89	75.49	.001	72.25	35.99	108.52	<.001
SQDBT cases	−6.48	−18.97	6.00	.309	−17.38	−38.00	3.24	.099
GCSF	−11.74	−26.50	3.01	.119	−12.34	−29.89	5.20	.168
After SQDBT	5.92	−5.66	17.50	.316	7.60	−6.17	21.38	.279
SQDBT case × GCSF case	8.56	−4.93	22.05	.213	7.87	−7.93	23.66	.329
SQDBT case × after SQDBT	−4.09	−18.35	10.17	.574	−1.21	−23.86	21.44	.917
GCSF case × after SQDBT	−4.42	−16.92	8.08	.488	−4.71	−19.02	9.60	.519

Abbreviations: GEE, generalized estimating equations; SQDBT: Shi Quan Da Bu Tang; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; GCSF, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor; ×, interaction.

The references were comparison status, no use of GCSF, and before SQDBT use. The significance level was set to P < .05.

Discussion

This study showed that 3-week intervention of SQDBT was effective in alleviating hematotoxicity among patients with breast carcinoma receiving chemotherapy, as manifested by the finding that the SQDBT cases had significantly higher WBC and Hb levels (or WBC and Hb decreased less) 1 week after chemotherapy. Although WBCs, neutrophils, and Hb levels were lower in the case group than the comparison group before chemotherapy, these levels decreased significantly less in patients receiving SQDBT 1 week after chemotherapy. The effect of SQDBT in alleviating the hematotoxicity of chemotherapy could be related to several mechanisms. Hisha et al²¹ suggested that fatty acids contained in the SQDBT might help in promoting the proliferation of hematopoietic stem cells. Ohnishi et al²² suggested that SQDBT could stimulate spleen colony-forming units, therefore alleviating hematopoietic injury induced by the anticancer drugs. Further study is needed to examine the mechanism linking SQDBT to increased WBC and Hb levels.

Previous studies support the effectiveness of GCSF for increasing neutrophil counts.^25-28 Our model showed that GCSF significantly increased the levels of WBCs and Hb before chemotherapy, but that these levels significantly decreased after chemotherapy. This is consistent with our observations that patients that ever used GCSF to treat neutropenia tended to continue to use GCSF in their following chemotherapy courses. We found that the SQDBT cases used less GCSF after use of SQDBT, whereas the comparison group had a correspondingly similar rate of GCSF use during the period. In addition, the effects of SQDBT on WBCs and Hb levels were not influenced by GCSF use, as indicated by the insignificant interaction term. Integrated use of GCSF and SQDBT may help keep neutrophil levels higher among patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy. Furthermore, use of SQDBT may decrease the need for GCSF.

We demonstrated that SQDBT alleviated hematotoxicity without counteracting the effect of chemotherapy, as indicated by the lack of significant differences between the case and comparison groups for CEA and CA153 levels in the short term. Several in vitro and animal studies suggest that SQDBT has antitumor effects,^18,19,29,30 but we did not find significantly decreased tumor marker CEA and CA153 expression among SQDBT cases. Whether SQDBT can decrease tumor cell growth or prevent relapse among patients with breast cancer is outside the scope of the current study and warrants further studies with a longer period of follow-up.

Limitations

The allotment of case and comparison status was based on patient’s decisions to seek TCM treatment with or without an oncologist’s referral in this study. Therefore, there might be a potential selection bias. Nonetheless, lower mean WBC and neutrophil levels before chemotherapy in the SQDBT case group suggested that the SQDBT group could be at higher risk for developing leucopenia and neutropenia after chemotherapy. In addition, as the prescribed SQDBT was taken home by the patients, we were unable to determine the actual intake of SQDBT and thus the patients may not have complied with the planned treatment. If that occurred, then our study could have underestimated the effect of SQDBT and our results could be viewed as a conservative scenario. We used a chemotherapy course as the unit of analysis. Since each patient received many courses of chemotherapy, it was not feasible to use individual patients as units of analysis. We used the GEE model to control the effects of study covariates and to account for correlated data. This approach could enhance the comparability of the case and control courses and increase data efficiency, since different courses of the same individual could serve either as cases or controls depending on whether SQDBT was used. Nonetheless, number of patients was small in the study and future study with larger sample size is needed to further validate our results. Since this study excluded patients that did not follow the usual 3-week cycle of chemotherapy, we could not examine whether SQDBT can prevent a delay in chemotherapy because of low levels of WBCs, Hb, and neutrophils. Patients with delayed chemotherapy usually had complicated underlying conditions, which could have confounded the study results. Further study is needed to address this issue. This study only examined the combined effects of the multiple components of SQDBT on alleviating hematotoxicity. The effect of individual ingredients of SQDBT is not clear. We only collected short-term data on tumor markers and the patients took SQDBT only during chemotherapy. Though some animal studies have shown that SQDBT could prevent malignant progression and metastasis of tumor cells,^18,19 yet the potential anticancer effect of SQDBT is beyond the scope of this study. Whether continuously taking SQDBT after completion of chemotherapy could prevent malignant progression merits further studies.

Conclusions

Shi Quan Da Bu Tang alleviated hematotoxicity among patients with breast carcinoma receiving chemotherapy, without affecting tumor marker expression in the short term. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the effects of SQDBT for cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported by the Committee on Chinese Medicine and Pharmacy, Department of Health, Taiwan (CCMP100-RD-026).

References

Department of Health, Executive Yuan, Taiwan. The mortality of cancer in Taiwan. http://www.doh.gov.tw/CHT2006/DM/DM2_2_p02.aspx?class_no=440&now_fod_list_no=11397&level_no=4&doc_no=76512. Updated 2007. Accessed November 15, 2010.

US Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics: 2002-2006 Incidence and Mortality Web-based Report. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and National Cancer Institute. http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov. Updated 2010. Accessed November 15, 2010.

Fan

Yuan

. Prospective study of vinorelbine and capecitabine combination therapy in Chinese patients with metastatic breast cancer pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes. Chemotherapy. 2010;56:340-347.

Takabatake

Taira

Hara

. Feasibility study of docetaxel with cyclophosphamide as adjuvant chemotherapy for Japanese breast cancer patients. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2009;39:478-483.

Fountzilas

Athanassiades

Papadimitriou

. Paclitaxel and carboplatin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. Oncology (Williston Park). 1998;12(1 suppl 1): S45-S48.

Kirshner

Hatch

Hennessy

Fridman

Tannous

. Anemia in stage II and III breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy. Oncologist. 2004;9:25-32.

Fortner

Houts

Schwartzberg

. A prospective investigation of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and quality of life. J Support Oncol. 2006;4:472-478.

McDermott

Blough

Fedorenko

. Complementary and alternative medicine use among newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 2012;20:65-73. doi:10.1007/s00520-010-1055-y.

Lin

Chen

Chiu

. Prevalence, patterns, and costs of Chinese medicine use among prostate cancer patients: a population-based study in Taiwan. Integr Cancer Ther. 2010;9:16-23.

10.

Shi

Chiu

Ker

Chen

Huang

. Utilization of medical resources by cancer patients from the Chi-Ching District in Kaohsiung. Formosa J Healthcare Admin. 2005;1:67-75.

11.

Ting

Huang

Chiu

Chou

Hou

. Utilizations of complementary and alternative medicine in breast cancer patients: survey of a regional hospital surgery outpatient department. Chin J Integrated Chin Western Med. 2007;9:7-13.

12.

Yang

Chien

Tai

. Use of complementary and alternative medicine among patients with cancer receiving outpatient chemotherapy in Taiwan. J Altern Complement Med. 2008;14:413-416.

13.

Ernst

Schmidt

Baum

. Complementary/alternative therapies for the treatment of breast cancer. A systematic review of randomized clinical trials and a critique of current terminology. Breast J. 2006;12:526-530.

14.

Zhang

Lowell

Yuan

. Effects of Erkang, a modified formulation of Chinese folk medicine Shi-Quan-Da-Bu-Tang, on mice. J Ethnopharmacol. 1998;61:153-159.

15.

Kamiyama

Takano

Ishikawa

Tsuboi

Matsumura

. Anti-angiogenic and immunomodulatory effect of the herbal medicine “Juzen-taiho-to” on malignant glioma. Biol Pharm Bull. 2005;28:2111-2116.

16.

Nakamoto

Mimura

Honda

. Orally administrated Juzen-taiho-to/TJ-48 ameliorates erythropoietin (rHuEPO)-resistant anemia in patients on hemodialysis. Hemodial Int. 2008;12(suppl 2):S9-S14.

17.

Kaneko

Chiba

Horie

. Effect of two different groups of Chinese medicines on nitric oxide production by mouse macrophage-like cells. In Vivo. 2004;18:771-778.

18.

Tagami

Niwa

Lian

Gao

Mori

Tamaya

. Preventive effect of Juzen-taiho-to on endometrial carcinogenesis in mice is based on Shimotsu-to constituent. Biol Pharm Bull. 2004;27:156-161.

19.

Saiki

. A Kampo medicine “Juzen-taiho-to”—prevention of malignant progression and metastasis of tumor cells and the mechanism of action. Biol Pharm Bull. 2000;23:677-688.

20.

Committee on Chinese Medicine and Pharmacy, Department of Health, Taiwan. Shi Quan Da Bu Tang. http://tcam.ccmp.gov.tw/meun_2_content.asp?aaa=104. Updated 2010. Accessed March 15, 2010.

21.

Hisha

Yamada

Sakurai

. Isolation and identification of hematopoietic stem cell-stimulating substances from Kampo (Japanese herbal) medicine, Juzen-taiho-to. Blood. 1997;90:1022-1030.

22.

Ohnishi

Yasumizu

Fan

. Effect of Juzen-taiho-to (TJ-48), traditional oriental medicine, on hematopoietic recovery from 5 cells with oleic acid and linolenic acid resulted in the radiation injury in mice. Exp Hematol. 1990;18:18-22.

23.

National Cancer Institute. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events ver. 3.0. http://safetyprofiler-ctep.nci.nih.gov/CTC/CTC.aspx. Updated 2004. Accessed March 15, 2010.

24.

Crespi

Wong

Mishra

. Using second-order generalized estimating equations to model heterogeneous intraclass correlation in cluster-randomized trials. Stat Med. 2009;28:814-827.

25.

Castagna

Bramanti

Levis

. Pegfilgrastim versus filgrastim after high-dose chemotherapy and autologous peripheral blood stem cell support. Ann Oncol. 2010; 21:1482-1485.

26.

Gerds

Fox-Geiman

Dawravoo

. Randomized phase III trial of pegfilgrastim versus filgrastim after autologus peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2010;16:678-685.

27.

Rivera

Erder

Moore

; Risk Model Study Group. Targeted filgrastim support in patients with early-stage breast carcinoma: toward the implementation of a risk model. Cancer. 2003;98:222-228.

28.

Smith

Khatcheressian

Lyman

. 2006 update of recommendations for the use of white blood cell growth factors: an evidence-based clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:3187-3205.

29.

Kogure

Ltoh

Tatsumi

. The effect of Juzen-taiho-to/TJ-48 on the expression of killer-cell immunoglobulin-like receptors (CD158a/b) on peripheral lymphocytes in vitro experiment. Phytomedicine. 2005;12:327-332.

30.

Fujiki

Nakamura

Matsuda

. IL-12 and IL-18 induction and subsequent NKT activation effects of the Japanese botanical medicine Juzentaihoto. Int J Mol Sci. 2008; 9:1142-1155.

Effectiveness of 3-Week Intervention of Shi Quan Da Bu Tang for Alleviating Hematotoxicity Among Patients With Breast Carcinoma Receiving Chemotherapy

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Study Participants

Chemotherapy Protocol

Shi Quan Da Bu Tang Protocol

Measurements

Data Analysis

Results

Characteristics by the Case–Comparison Status

White Blood Cell Counts

Hemoglobin Level

Tumor Markers

Discussion

Limitations

Conclusions

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

References