Learn about the medical, dental, pharmacy, behavioral, and voluntary benefits your employer may offer.
This cancer information summary provides an overview of the use of mistletoe as a treatment for people with cancer. The summary includes a brief history of mistletoe research, the results of clinical trials, and possible side effects of mistletoe use.
This summary contains the following key information:
Many of the medical and scientific terms used in this summary are hypertext linked (at first use in each section) to the
Reference citations in some PDQ cancer information summaries may include links to external websites that are operated by individuals or organizations for the purpose of marketing or advocating the use of specific treatments or products. These reference citations are included for informational purposes only. Their inclusion should not be viewed as an endorsement of the content of the websites, or of any treatment or product, by the PDQ Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies Editorial Board or the National Cancer Institute.
Mistletoe, a semiparasitic plant, holds interest as a potential anticancer agent because extracts derived from it have been shown to kill cancer cells in vitro[
Three components of mistletoe, namely viscotoxins, polysaccharides, and lectins, may be responsible for these effects.[
In view of mistletoe's ability to stimulate the immune system, it has been classified as a type of biological response modifier.[
Preparations from mistletoe extracts are most frequently used in the treatment of cancer patients in German-speaking countries.[
In addition to European mistletoe, extracts from a type of Korean mistletoe (Viscum album var. coloratum [Kom.] Ohwi) have demonstrated in vitro and in vivo cytotoxicity in laboratory studies.[
Mistletoe grows on several types of trees, and the chemical composition of extracts derived from it depends on the following:[
Mistletoe extracts are prepared as aqueous solutions or solutions of water and alcohol, and they can be fermented or unfermented.[
Helixor, an unfermented aqueous extract of Viscum album L. that is standardized by its biological effect on human leukemia cells in vitro, is marketed as one of the following:[
Eurixor (which is no longer commercially available), an unfermented aqueous extract of Viscum album L. harvested from poplar trees, is reportedly standardized to contain a specific amount of one of mistletoe's lectins (i.e., the lectin ML-1).[
A recombinant ML-1 from Escherichia coli bacteria known as rViscumin or aviscumine has been studied in the laboratory and in phase I clinical trials. Because this is not an extract of mistletoe, it is out of the purview of this summary.[
Mistletoe extracts are usually given by subcutaneous injection, although administration by other routes (i.e., oral, intrapleural, intratumoral, and intravenous) has been described.[
Viscum album is listed in the Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States, which is the officially recognized compendium for homeopathic drugs in this country.[
In this summary, the mistletoe extract or product used in each study will be specified wherever possible.
References:
Mistletoe has been used for centuries for its medicinal properties.[
Another reported activity of mistletoe that may be relevant to optimum functioning of the immune system in individuals with cancer is stabilization of the DNA in white blood cells, including white blood cells that have been exposed to DNA-damaging chemotherapy drugs.[
Mistletoe has been shown to stimulate increases in the number and the activity of various types of white blood cells.[
References:
The immune system –stimulating and cytotoxic properties of mistletoe have been investigated in laboratory and animal studies.
Viscotoxins and lectins have been investigated as active components in mistletoe; most research has focused on the lectins.[
ML-1 (or viscumin) may be responsible for many of mistletoe's biological effects. When a laboratory method was used to selectively deplete ML-1 from Viscum album extracts, their cytotoxic and immune system–stimulating properties were markedly reduced.[
The molecular structure of ML-1 consists of an alpha chain and a beta chain, which can be separated from one another.[
Recombinant ML-1, rML (also known as rViscumin or aviscumine) appears to have the same efficacy as plant-based ML-1 in laboratory studies.[
The beta chain of ML-1 is responsible for binding to the surface of a target cell.[
Laboratory studies have shown that mistletoe extracts can stimulate the activity of white blood cells in vitro and cause them to release molecules thought to be important for anticancer immune responses.[
There are conflicting reports concerning the stimulation of cancer cell growth in vitro. In one study, the in vitro growth of several types of human cancer cells was stimulated by treatment with low doses of the purified lectin ML-1.[
Preclinical studies demonstrating biological effects on cancer cell lines and animal models are summarized in Table 1 and Table 2.
IscadorQu = IscadorQ; ML-1 = mistletoe extracts with mistletoe lectins I. | ||
a For more information and definition of terms, see text and the |
||
Iscador | ||
Cell Line | Outcome | Reference |
Various human cancer cell lines | Iscador preparations containing a high lectin concentration (15 μg/mL) showed >70% growth inhibition in themammarycancer cell line (MAXF 401NL) compared with untreated control cells; 30%–70% growth inhibition in threetumorcell lines (leukemiaRPMI 8226,non-small cell lungLXFE 66NL, anduterineUXF 1138L) for IscadorM and in seven tumor cell lines (central nervous systemSF268,gastricGXF 251L, non-small cell lung LXFE 66NL and LXFL 529L,prostatePC3M, renal RXF 944L, and uterine UXF 1138L) for IscadorQu | [ |
Humanmedulloblastomacells Daoy, D341, D425, and UW 228-2 | Viscum albumpreparations (0.1–100µg /mL) induced cell death throughapoptosis. Growth-inhibition correlated with the lectin content of the used preparation | [ |
Various human cancer cell lines: SF268 (central nervous system); GXF 251 (gastric); H460, LXFA 629L, LXFE 66NL, LXFL 529L (lung); CCRFCEM, MOLT-4, HL-60, K562, U937, RPMI 8226 (leukemia andlymphoma); MCF7, MAXF 401NL (mammary); HT144, MALME-3M, SK-MEL28, MEXF 462NL, MEXF 514L (melanoma); PC3M (prostate); RXF 393NL, RXF 944L (renal); Hs729, SK-LMS-1, SK-UT-1B (sarcoma); and UXF 1138L (uterus) | IscadorM and IscadorQu with a high lectin content demonstratedantitumoractivityin vitro at high test concentrations (15–150 µg/mL) | [ |
Human cell lines: HCC1937, HCC1143 (breast), PA-TU-8902 (pancreas), DU145 (prostate), NCI-H460 (lung) | Cell proliferation inhibition was detected with a mistletoe dose at 100 μg/mL in cell lines PA-TU-8902 and NCI-H460, and a dose at ≥10 μg/mL in cell lines HCC1937, HCC1143, and DU145 | [ |
Glioblastomacells: LNT-229, LN-308 | Cell growth was reduced with IscadorQ and IscadorM at lectin concentrations of 100 µg/mL | [ |
Helixor | ||
Cell Line | Outcome | Reference |
Various human cancer cell lines | Helixor mistletoe preparations (15–150 µg/mL) and ML-1 (10–100 ng/mL) did not induce cell proliferation | [ |
abnobaVISCUM | ||
Cell Line | Outcome | Reference |
Human tumor cell lines:B-cellhybridomas, P815, EL-4, Ke37, MOLT-4, and U937 | Growth arrest was caused by the induction of apoptosis (50% of U937 cells at 100 ng/mL of ML-1 and 40% of B-cell hybridomas and EL-4 cells at concentrations as low as 1 ng/mL of ML-1) | [ |
Studies of the ability of mistletoe to inhibit cancer cell growth in animals have yielded mixed and inconsistent results.[
ALL = acute lymphoblastic leukemia; ME-A = mistletoe extracts (fir treeAbies); ME-M = mistletoe extracts (apple treeMalus); ML-1 = mistletoe extracts with mistletoe lectins I; ML-3 = mistletoe extracts with mistletoe lectins III; MT-A = mistletoe extracts obtained from fir trees; MT-P = mistletoe extracts obtained from pine trees; NK = natural killer. | ||
a For more information and definition of terms, see text and the |
||
Iscador | ||
Animal Model | Outcome | Reference |
Mice | Antiproliferative and antimetastatic effects in melanoma cell line MV3 were only achieved with low-dose ML-1 (30 ng/kg body weight) and not with higher doses (150 ng/kg and 500 ng/kg); increased number of infiltratingdendritic cellssuggests stimulation of the immune system | [ |
Mice | Viscum albumextract (20 µg/mouse/d) mediated inhibition of B16F1 melanoma cells tumor growth was associated withimmunomodulationvia induction ofIL-12secretion leading to enhancedT-cellandNK-cellfunctions | [ |
Mice | Organcolonization was investigated on day 14 after RAW 117 H 10lymphosarcomacell and L-1 sarcoma cell inoculation and demonstratedstatistically significant(P< .05) reductions ofexperimental liverand lungmetastasesfor standardizedaqueousmistletoe extract–treated mice (2 µg, 20 µg, 100 µg, and 500 µg per mouse) | [ |
Mice (Nude and VMDk mice) | Glioblastoma tumor growth was reduced (cell lines LNT-229 and LN-308), the expression ofgenesassociated withtumor progressionwas reduced, andNK cellmediated glioblastoma celllysiswas enhanced when IscadorQ and IscadorM 100 µg/mL was administered by anintratumoralinjection | [ |
BDF and Swiss albino mice | Treatment with IscadorM (50mg /kg/d and 100 mg/kg/d) increased the survival time of mice that had been implanted with Ehrlich ascites mouse cancer cells, but not L1210 leukemia or B16 melanoma cancer cells | [ |
Swiss albino mice | No antitumor effect or improvement in survival was observed when IscadorM (15.75 mg, 750 mg, 10.5 mg, 500 mg) was used to treat rats bearing chemically induced mammarycarcinomasor tumors formed from rat Walker 256 carcinosarcoma cells; IscadorM (5 mg, 200 mg, 150 mg, 3.75 mg) was also not effective in treating mice that had been injected with Ehrlich ascites cells; in addition, IscadorP (135 mg) was found ineffective in treating rats with tumors formed from rat L5222 leukemia cells | [ |
Helixor | ||
Animal Model | Outcome | Reference |
SCIDmice | Despite a considerably lower ML-3 content, MT-A (50 mg/kg and 100 mg/kg) was more effective and lesstoxicthan MT-P (50 mg/kg) in a humanacute lymphoblastic leukemiacell line (NALM-6); both were given intraperitoneally in mice inoculated with human ALL | [ |
Humanductalbreast carcinoma cell line BT474 | As compared with tumors of control mice, tumors of the ME-A– and ME-M–treated groups (5 mg intratumoral injection) showed a decreased cell proliferation rate, as well as an increased cellnecrosisand apoptosis rate | [ |
abnobaVISCUM | ||
Animal Model | Outcome | Reference |
Nude mice | Intratumoral injections of mistletoe extract (abnobaVISCUM Fraxini-2, 8 mg/kg body weight and lectin at 5.3 µg/kg body weight) demonstrated more antitumor activity than didintravenous gemcitabinewhen injected into mice bearing xenografts of humanpancreatic adenocarcinoma cancer(PAXF 736) | [ |
Isorel | ||
Animal Model | Outcome | Reference |
Mice | In micetransplantedwithfibrosarcoma(CMC-2), when IsorelM (140 mg/kg) was used alone, no effect on either tumor growth or animal survival was observed. When IsorelM (140 mg/kg) was combined withx-ray therapyof tumors, there was substantial improvements in survival of mice compared with survival of mice treated with x-ray therapy (43 Gy) alone | [ |
Eurixor | ||
Animal Model | Outcome | Reference |
Mice | Aqueous mistletoe extract (30 ng/mL or 300 ng/mL) showed antitumoral activity onurinary bladdercarcinoma (MB49) in mice, which was considered to be mainly caused by the cytotoxic properties of mistletoe lectins | [ |
Lektinol | ||
Animal Model | Outcome | Reference |
Mice | Treatment with Lektinol (0.3, 3, 30, or 300 ng/mL/kg/d) slowed the growth of tumors formed in mice from implants of three types of mouse cancers (colonadenocarcinoma 38, Rencarenal cell carcinoma, and F9testicularcarcinoma) but not from two other mouse cancers (B16 melanoma and Lewis lung carcinoma) | [ |
References:
Mistletoe has been evaluated as a treatment for people with cancer in numerous clinical studies.[
The mistletoe extracts and products studied in clinical trials were Iscador, Eurixor, Helixor, Lektinol, Isorel, abnobaVISCUM,[
The findings from more than 50 clinical trials of mistletoe extracts in patients with cancer have been published, and several systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the results of these studies have been performed. Three of the most recent systematic reviews addressed quality of life (QOL), survival, and symptom relief in patients with various cancer types.[
In one systematic review that examined 26 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 22 trials reported an improvement in QOL. All 10 of the nonRCTs also reported the same benefit. Improvement in fatigue, nausea and vomiting, depression, emotional well-being, and concentration were reported. Some of the studies were well designed, while others reported weaknesses.[
Tumor response, QOL, and psychological distress were measured in a review of 21 RCTs of various cancers in which different mistletoe preparations were used either alone, with chemotherapy, or with radiation therapy.[
The oldest of these three reviews investigated the results of 10 RCTs that used a variety of mistletoe extracts in patients with various malignancies. There was no difference in survival or other benefits for cancer patients who received mistletoe. Therefore, mistletoe was not recommended as a curative or supportive care therapy.[
A systematic review of all controlled clinical studies of mistletoe found consistent improvement in chemotherapy-associated fatigue as well as other QOL measures.[
Although mistletoe was found to be therapeutically effective in most of the reported studies, many of the studies had one or more major design weaknesses as mentioned above that raised doubts about the reliability of the findings. These weaknesses include the following:
In addition, evaluation of the studies is often hindered by incomplete descriptions of the study design and by incomplete reporting of clinical data, including data about previous and concurrent therapies received by the patients. Note: In studies with small numbers of patients, the mean survival time can be greatly exaggerated if one or more patients exhibit unusually long survival; median survival, therefore, is a less biased measure.
A selection of studies is discussed below, organized by the type of mistletoe extract used. Studies on Iscador are summarized in Table 3. Studies on Helixor, abnobaVISCUM, Eurixor, Isorel, and Lektinol are summarized in Table 4. Eurixor, Isorel, and Vysorel are no longer available on the market for sale.
Iscador
Quality of life
Miscellaneous cancers
Although the quality of literature is limited by methodological flaws, prospective and controlled studies that explored the efficacy of Iscador use on QOL in patients with cancer generally report positive effects in favor of complementary treatment. A meta-analysis of several studies (RCTs: n = 9; non-RCTs: n = 4; patients n = 734) reported a statistically significant overall treatment effect in favor of Iscador application (standard mean deviation [SMD], 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41–0.71; P < .0001).[
Breast cancer
A randomized study of postoperative early-stage breast cancer patients (T1, 3N0, 2M0) who received adjuvant chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, Adriamycin, and fluorouracil found that patients who also received IscadorM treatment, a Viscum album extract harvested from apple (Mali) trees (n = 30), had significantly superior QOL ratings compared with patients who received chemotherapy alone (n = 31) (95% CI, P ≤ .017).[
Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)
At least two RCTs have assessed the QOL of patients with advanced NSCLC. Patients who received carboplatin /gemcitabine or carboplatin/pemetrexed and were randomly assigned to receive open-label IscadorQu treatment, a Viscum album extract harvested from oak (Quercus) trees, did not report statistically significant improvements in QOL when compared with NSCLC patients who received carboplatin-based combinations alone.[
Osteosarcoma
QOL was assessed as a secondary endpoint in a small (n = 20) study of patients with osteosarcoma. Patients were free from disease after their second metastatic relapse and were randomly assigned to receive either open-label IscadorP therapy, a Viscum album extract harvested from pine (Pini) trees, or oral etoposide. Patients who received Iscador therapy experienced significant improvements in overall (global) and individual QOL domains when compared with baseline functioning (global health/QOL; 95% CI, 2.62–19.72; P = .013).[
Ovarian cancer
Ovarian cancer patients without metastases (n = 21 pairs) were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant Iscador (host tree unspecified) or no further treatment. Significant improvements in QOL were noted, as assessed by the degree of psychosomatic self-regulation, described as the capacity for autonomous regulation of emotional, social, and psychological factors, within 12 months of treatment (estimated median difference: 0.58; 95% CI, 0.30–0.90; P = .0002).[
Uterine cancer
Secondary endpoint analysis of uterine cancer patients without metastases (randomized: n = 30 pairs; nonrandomized: n = 103 pairs) who received adjuvant Iscador displayed significant improvements in psychosomatic self-regulation within 12 months of treatment when compared with women who received conventional oncological therapy alone (estimated median difference and 95% CI, 0.40 [0.15–0.70]; P = .0012; and 0.70 [0.25–1.15], P = .0037, respectively).[
Symptom management
Breast cancer
In a study of postoperative early-stage breast cancer patients (T1, 3N0, 2M0) who were randomly assigned to receive open-label IscadorM therapy after chemotherapy (n = 30), a secondary endpoint analysis did not demonstrate statistically significant improvements in neutropenia (neutrophil count <1,000/µL) when compared with patients who received chemotherapy alone (n = 31).[
Another study (retrolective design) of postoperative early-stage breast cancer patients (T2, 4N0, 2M0) who received adjuvant conventional treatment (chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or hormonal therapy) (n = 710) compared the outcomes of patients who received Iscador with patients who did not receive any added therapy. Patients who received Iscador developed significantly less adverse drug reactions associated with conventional treatment compared with women treated with conventional therapy alone (n = 732) (16% vs. 54.0%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.32–0.67; P < .001).[
Head and neck cancers
After surgery of squamous cell lesions of the larynx and pharynx, male patients who were randomly assigned to receive complementary IscadorQu treatment (n = 10) displayed significantly fewer adverse effects from chemotherapy and radiation therapy (radiation therapy with 50–60 Gy, chemotherapy with cisplatin and fluorouracil) on the microcirculation and immunological capacities of white blood cells compared with men who received conventional treatment alone (n = 10) (P = .05).[
Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)
Patients with advanced NSCLC who received carboplatin/gemcitabine or carboplatin/pemetrexed and were randomly assigned to receive open-label IscadorQu treatment (n = 33) displayed the following reactions when compared with patients who received chemotherapy alone (n = 39):[
The grades 3 and 4 hematological toxicity was not significantly different between the groups.
Survival
Miscellaneous cancers
A systematic review and meta-analysis of several studies published from 1963 to 2014, including RCTs, found that adjuvant treatment with Iscador is associated with improved cancer survival outcomes when compared with conventional treatment alone.[
Breast cancer
Primary breast cancer patients (without recurrences, lymphatic metastases, or distant metastases at the initiation of study observation; n = 84 pairs) who received Iscador therapy adjuvant to conventional treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or hormone therapy) displayed prolonged cancer-specific survival rates when matched to paired individuals with similar prognostic criteria who received conventional treatment alone (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.27–0.68).[
In another study, OS was evaluated as a secondary endpoint in patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer (T2, 4N0, 2M0) who underwent adjuvant treatment concomitant with regimented Iscador injections.[
Cervical cancer
Patients with metastatic (n = 66) or local (n = 102) cervical cancer who elected to receive Iscador in addition to conventional oncological treatment demonstrated significant extensions of OS when compared with women with similar prognostic criteria who received conventional treatment alone (HR and 95% CI, 0.37 [0.17–0.80] and 0.23 [0.14–0.39], respectively).[
Colorectal cancer
Patients with surgically-treated, nonmetastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) (stages I–III) (n = 429) who received Iscador treatment with conventional aftercare displayed a statistically significant extension of DFS (HR, 0.60; P = .013) when compared with CRC patients who received conventional therapy alone (n = 375) after a median observation period of 58 months for patients who received Iscador and 51 months for patients who received conventional therapy alone.[
Melanoma
A phase III study of melanoma patients (n = 102) with high-risk primary disease (stage II, Breslow thickness >3mm) or regional lymph node metastasis (stage III, after curative dissection) treated with IscadorM found no clinical benefit of low-dose adjuvant therapy in the disease-free interval when compared with the control group (n = 102) after one year of treatment (or until tumor progression).[
Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)
Lymph node –positive NSCLC patients (n = 87) who were randomly assigned to receive Iscador therapy (without concurrent treatment) displayed significant extensions in median survival rates when compared with untreated controls.[
Osteosarcoma
Osteosarcoma patients who underwent a complete surgical resection after a second relapse were randomly assigned to receive IscadorP maintenance therapy (subcutaneous injections three times a week) (n = 9) for 1 year. After a follow-up period of 12 years, patients displayed a 71% reduced risk of relapse (measured as postrelapse DFS; HR, 0.287; 95% CI, 0.076–0.884; P = .03) when compared with patients who received 6 months of oral etoposide treatment (50 mg /m2 a day for 21 days, every 28 days) (n = 10).[
Ovarian cancer
Primary ovarian cancer patients without distant metastases (n = 21 pairs) who received Iscador therapy after conventional treatment (surgery and chemotherapy) displayed prolonged OS rates when compared with patients with similar prognostic criteria who received conventional treatment alone (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.31–0.69; P = .0002).[
Pancreatic cancer
Patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer (UICC stage III or stage IV) who were randomly assigned to receive open-label Iscador therapy as an adjuvant to best supportive care methods (n = 110) demonstrated prolonged survival when compared with patients under similar prognostic criteria who received supportive care alone (n = 110). The median OS was 4.8 months for patients who received Iscador and 2.2 months for patients who received supportive care alone (prognosis-adjusted HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.36–0.65; P < .0001).[
A retrospective analysis investigated the effects of mistletoe and chemotherapy with hyperthermia versus mistletoe and chemotherapy in the palliative treatment of patients with pancreatic cancer. The results of the analysis found a significant improvement in survival rates for patients who received all three treatments. Weaknesses of the analysis include the retrospective nature of the study, multiple types of chemotherapy (gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel, 34%; FOLFIRINOX, 36%; gemcitabine, 30%) and mistletoe (e.g., Iscador, Abnoba viscum, or Helixor) regimens used, and the lack of a study arm for hyperthermia and chemotherapy.[
In a retrospective analysis of patients with stages I to IV pancreatic cancer (n = 292) who received Iscador (host tree unspecified) therapy alone or adjuvant to conventional treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, hormone therapy, or a combination) (n = 61), a median survival of 6.58 months was reported.[
Uterine cancer
Patients with corpus uteri cancer without distant metastases (n = 30 pairs) were randomly assigned to receive Iscador therapy adjuvant to conventional treatment (surgery or radiation therapy). Patients had longer OS (time from initial diagnosis to tumor-related death) than matched pairs of patients with similar prognostic criteria who received conventional treatment alone (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16–0.82; P = .014).[
Reference | Trial Design | Conditionor Cancer Type | Treatment Groups (Enrolled; Treated; Placebo or No Treatment Control)b | Results | Concurrent TherapyUsedc | Level of EvidenceScored |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DFS = disease-free survival; LN+ = lymph node–positive disease; No. = number; OS = overall survival; QOL = quality of life. | ||||||
a For more information and definition of terms, see text and the |
||||||
b Number of patients treated plus number of patients controlled may not equal number of patients enrolled; number of patients enrolled = number of patients initially recruited/considered by the researchers who conducted a study; number of patients treated = number of enrolled patients who were administered the treatment being studied and for whom results were reported;historical control subjectsare not included in number of patients enrolled. | ||||||
c Chemotherapy, radiation therapy, hormonal therapy, orcytokine therapyadministered/allowed at the same time as mistletoe therapy. | ||||||
d For information about levels of evidence analysis and scores, see Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies. | ||||||
e Control patients were treated with a vitamin B mixture as a placebo; 100 additional evaluable patients were treated with Polyerga Neu, a sheep spleen glycopeptide reported to be an immunostimulant and an inhibitor of tumor cell glycolysis; treatment with Polyerga Neu was not found to be beneficial. | ||||||
f Radiation therapy for metastases distant from the site of theprimary tumorwas permitted; radiation therapy to the primary tumor site or use of other anticancer treatment was not permitted. | ||||||
g Among 10,226 cancer patients enrolled in a retrospective matched-pair,case-control study, 1,751 had been treated with Iscador or another mistletoe product and 8,475 had not been treated with mistletoe; from the 8,475 untreated patients, two sets of matched pairs were formed for prospective studies; in the prospective studies, one member of each pair was randomly assigned to be treated with Iscador and the other member served as a control subject. | ||||||
h Patients were strictly matched according to sex, year of birth ± 3 years, year of diagnosis ± 3 years, type of tumor, stage of disease, and conventional therapy received. | ||||||
[ |
Randomized trial | Lung, non-small cell,inoperable | 408; 105; 107e | Subjective improvement in QOL | Yesf | 1iiA |
[ |
Randomized trial | Lung, non-small cell, stages I–IV | 218; 87; 96 | Improved median survival, LN+ patients only | No | 1iiA |
[ |
Randomized trial | Melanoma, stages II–III | 204; 102; 102 | No improvement in DFS or OS rates | No | 1iiA |
[ |
Randomized trial | Pancreatic, advanced or metastatic | 220; 110; 110 | Improved OS | No | 1iiA |
[ |
Randomized trial | Osteosarcoma, second metastatic relapse | 20; 9 (viscum); 11 (etoposide) | Improved DFS compared with etoposide group | No | 1iiDii |
[ |
Randomized trial | Breast | 95; 30 (IscadorM) and 34 (HelixorA); 31 | No differences in the primary outcome between groups | Yes | 1iiC |
[ |
Comparative, retrolective,cohort study | Breast, stages I–IV | 1,442; 710; 732 | Fewer adverse drug reactions with mistletoe | Yes | 2B |
[ |
Comparative, retrolective, cohort study | Melanoma, stages II–III | 686; 329; 357 | Improved overall disease-specific survival | Unknown | 2A |
[ |
Cohort study | Breast, stage III | 8,475g; 17h; 17h | Improved mean survival | Yes | None |
[ |
Cohort study | Various types, stages I–IV | 8,475g; 39h; 39h | Improved mean survival | Yes | None |
[ |
Cohort study | Various types, stages I–IV | 10,226g; 396h; 396h | Improved mean survival | Yes | None |
[ |
Retrospective, observational, cohort study | Nonmetastatic colorectal | 804; 429; 375 | Lowerincidenceof diarrhea, nausea, loss of appetite,dermatitis, fatigue, and mucositis | Yes | 2C |
[ |
Retrospective analysis study | Pancreatic | 206 (subgroup of 142 using survival data on 124); 25 (chemotherapy alone); 48 (chemotherapy and mistletoe), 50 (chemotherapy, mistletoe, and hyperthermia); 1 (chemotherapy and hyperthermia) | Improved survival was reported in the triplet arm | Yes | 2A |
[ |
Nonconsecutive case series | Pancreatic | 292; 292; various historical controls | Improved median survival | Yes | 3iiiA |
Helixor
Safety
The first intravenous (IV) trial of mistletoe (HelixorM) is completed.[
Quality of life
Miscellaneous cancers
Patients with cancer (breast, n = 67; ovarian, n = 66; NSCLC, n = 91) were randomly assigned to receive open-label treatment with HelixorA (viscum album abietis) concurrent with standard chemotherapy (n = 115). These patients demonstrated significant improvements in QOL (as assessed by Functional Living Index-Cancer, Karnofsky Performance Index, and Traditional Chinese Medicine Index questionnaires) when compared with patients in the control group, who received conventional oncologic treatment and Lentinan, an immunomodulating agent derived from the shiitake mushroom (n = 109) (P < .05).[
Symptom management
Malignant pleural effusion
Pleurodesis with HelixorM (Viscum album mali) may be an effective procedure to control malignant pleural effusions (MPE) in patients with advanced lung cancer.[
Survival
Breast cancer
Patients with breast cancer (T1–3, N0–3, M0; local recurrence) were randomly assigned to receive Helixor adjuvant to conventional therapy (i.e., surgery and radiation therapy) (n = 192). These patients demonstrated a significant extension in 5-year survival when compared with patients who received conventional treatment alone (n = 274) (5-year survival rates, 69.1% vs. 59.7%, respectively) (P = .048).[
Colorectal cancer
Patients with metastatic CRC were randomly assigned to receive Helixor adjuvant to chemotherapy (n = 20). These patients demonstrated significant extensions in mean survival (26.7 ± 11.9 months in complete/partial responders) when compared with patients randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy alone (n = 20) (13.6 ± 4.4 months in complete/partial responders).[
abnobaVISCUM
Quality of life
Breast cancer
As per QLQ-C30 function scales, health-related QOL in patients with breast cancer (stages I–III) who received abnobaVISCUMM concurrent with chemotherapy (n = 270) remained stable throughout the course of chemotherapy and significantly improved 4 weeks after treatment (P < .0001) when compared with the initial visit.[
Stomach cancer
Postoperative patients with gastric cancer (stage IB or stage II) were randomly assigned to receive abnobaVISCUMQ adjuvant to oral chemotherapy (n = 15). These patients demonstrated a significant improvement in global health status (a parameter constructed by totaling scores on two questions from the QLQ-C30 questionnaire) at week 16 and at completion of treatment (week 24), when compared with patients who received oral chemotherapy alone (n = 14) (P = .0098).[
Symptom management
Miscellaneous cancers
Patients with advanced cancer were treated with abnobaVISCUM pleurodesis for MPE (n = 62). These patients demonstrated a significant improvement in mean response rate (P < .0001) when compared with reference values (97% and 64%, respectively).[
Colorectal cancer
Symptomatic relief was reported by 40% of patients with metastatic CRC who were resistant to fluorouracil and leucovorin (5-FU/LV)-based chemotherapy and received abnobaVISCUMQ therapy (n = 25). Symptomatic relief was assessed as a secondary endpoint measure for a median duration of 14 weeks.[
Stomach cancer
In one study, postoperative patients with gastric cancer (stage IB or stage II) were randomly assigned to receive abnobaVISCUMQ adjuvant to oral chemotherapy (n = 15). The secondary endpoint analyses demonstrated a significant improvement in leukocyte (P = .01) and eosinophil (P = .0036) counts when compared with patients who received oral chemotherapy alone (n = 14) after a 24-week treatment cycle.[
Survival
Bladder cancer
A marker tumor remission rate of 55.6% (95% CI, 38.1–72.1) was achieved in 20 of 36 patients with nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer (Ta G1/G2 or T1 G1/G2) 12 weeks after beginning bladder instillation therapy with abnobaVISCUMF (once a week for 6 weeks).[
Colorectal cancer
Objective tumor response was not observed in a phase II study of patients with metastatic CRC who were resistant to 5-FU/LV-based chemotherapy and received abnobaVISCUMQ therapy for a median time period of 14 weeks. Stable disease was noted in 21 of 25 patients (84%), lasting for a median of 2.5 months (range; 1.5–7 months).[
Eurixor
Eurixor is no longer available on the market for sale.
Quality of life
Colorectal cancer
Patients with metastatic CRC were randomly assigned to receive Eurixor adjuvant to standard cancer treatment (n = 38). These patients demonstrated improved QOL (P = .0001) when compared with patients randomly assigned to receive standard treatment alone (n = 41).[
Symptom management
Breast cancer
Patients with breast cancer (UICC stages I–IIIB) underwent postoperative chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or hormone therapy, and received complementary treatment with Eurixor (n = 219) for a median time period of 270 days. These patients demonstrated significant improvements in disease- or therapy-induced adverse reactions (P < .0001) when compared with patients who received standard cancer therapy alone (n = 470) at up to 285 days of follow-up.[
Survival
Bladder cancer
Patients with bladder cancer (pTa G1/G2) (n = 45) received subcutaneous Eurixor injections after transurethral resection. These patients did not demonstrate differences in time-to-first recurrence, total number of recurrences, or recurrence-free outcomes at up to 18 months after primary treatment compared with patients who were randomly assigned to receive no adjuvant treatment.[
Head and neck cancers
Patients treated with Eurixor before and after resection of squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck, with or without follow-up radiation therapy, demonstrated no difference in DFS when compared with patients who received surgery alone or surgery followed by radiation therapy, without adjuvant Eurixor treatment.[
Isorel
Isorel is no longer available on the market for sale.
Biomarker study
Gastrointestinal cancers
Perioperative use of Isorel in patients with cancer of the digestive tract (esophageal, stomach, pancreatic, ileac, colorectal) has been shown to increase the lymphocyte count in patients within 14 days of administration.[
Survival
Colorectal cancer
Patients with advanced CRC (Dukes C and D) were randomly assigned to receive Isorel along with adjuvant postoperative chemotherapy with 5-FU (6 cycles) (n = 29). These patients demonstrated prolonged survival (P < .05) when compared with patients who received postoperative chemotherapy only (n = 21) and patients who received surgery only (n = 14) without postoperative chemotherapy or Isorel treatment (n = 14).[
Lektin/Lektinol
Quality of life
Breast cancer
Patients with breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive open-label PS76A (an aqueous mistletoe extract standardized to the galactoside-specific mistletoe lectin [ML]) adjuvant to chemotherapy (n = 176). These patients demonstrated improved QOL when compared with patients who received chemotherapy alone.[
In a double-blind study, patients with breast cancer (stages II–III) were randomly assigned to receive PS76A2 (Lektinol; 30 ng ML/mL) adjuvant to cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy (4 cycles) for a period of 15 consecutive weeks (n = 65). These patients demonstrated statistically significant improvements in self-assessments of QOL (P = .0121 and P = .0021 for GLQ-8 and Spitzer's uniscale, respectively) when compared with patients who were randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy treatment alone (n = 66).[
Systematic Reviews/Meta-analyses of VariousViscum AlbumExtract (VAE) Types
Quality of life
Miscellaneous cancers
Some systematic reviews have found that studies of better methodological quality typically show that Viscum album extracts (VAEs) have few beneficial effects on QOL in cancer,[
However, another systematic review reached different conclusions. In a review consisting of 26 RCTs, 22 reported a benefit of mistletoe therapy (supplied with or without concomitant surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation therapy), whereas 3 reported no difference, and 1 did not indicate a result.[
Survival
Miscellaneous cancers
Systematic reviews reported inconsistent results regarding the efficacy of mistletoe treatment on survival outcomes on the basis of methodological quality of the study.[
In another review of 23 controlled clinical studies (16 randomized, 2 quasi-randomized, and 5 nonrandomized) that investigated the use of VAE in patients with cancers of the breast, lung, stomach, colon, rectum, head and neck, kidney, genitals, bladder, melanomas, and gliomas, positive effects on survival were indicated in 8 studies and tumor remission was supported by 1 study.[
Reference | Trial Design | Product Tested | Condition or Cancer Type | Treatment Groups (Enrolled; Treated; Placebo or No Treatment Control)b | Results | Concurrent Therapy Usedc | Level of Evidence Scored |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DFS = disease-free survival; No. = number; QOL = quality of life. | |||||||
a For more information and definition of terms, see text and the |
|||||||
b Number of patients treated plus number of patients controlled may not equal number of patients enrolled; number of patients enrolled = number of patients initially recruited/considered by the researchers who conducted a study; number of patients treated = number of enrolled patients who were administered the treatment being studied and for whom results were reported; historical control subjects are not included in number of patients enrolled. | |||||||
c Chemotherapy, radiation therapy, hormonal therapy, or cytokine therapy administered/allowed at the same time as mistletoe therapy. | |||||||
d For information about levels of evidence analysis and scores, see Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies. | |||||||
e This was a four-arm trial; patients were randomly assigned to surgery only or to surgery plus radiation therapy, followed by a second randomization to no mistletoe treatment or to treatment with Eurixor; the resulting treatment groups contained the following numbers of evaluable patients: surgery only = 105, surgery plus Eurixor = 97, surgery plus radiation therapy = 137, and surgery plus radiation therapy plus Eurixor = 138; radiation therapy and Eurixor treatment overlapped; no treatment approach was superior in terms of disease-free survival, disease-specific survival, improvement in QOL, or stimulation of the immune system; in the table, mistletoe-treated and nontreated (control) patients were grouped (i.e., number treated = 97 + 138 = 235, and number control = 105 + 137 = 242). | |||||||
[ |
Randomized trial | Eurixor | Bladder, noninvasive | 45; 23; 22 | DFS did not vary between groups | No | 1iiDi |
[ |
Randomized trial | Eurixor | Brain, glioma; 74% of patients, stages III–IV; 26% of patients, no stage information | 47; 20; 18 | Improved survival, stages III–IV patients only | Yes | 1iiA |
[ |
Randomized trial | Eurixor | Colorectal, metastatic | 107; 38; 41 | Improved QOL | Yes | 1iiC |
[ |
Randomized trial | Eurixor | Head and neck, squamous cell, stages I–IV | 495; 235e; 242e | No differences in DFS between groups | Yese | 1iiDi |
[ |
Randomized trial | Helixor | Breast, stages I–III | 692; 192 (Helixor) and 177 (chemotherapy); 274 | Improved survival | Yes | 1iiA |
[ |
Randomized trial | Helixor | Colorectal, metastatic | 60; 20; 20 | Improved mean survival | Yes | 1iiA |
[ |
Randomized trial | Helixor | Breast, ovarian, and non-small cell lung | 224; 115; 109 | Improved QOL | Yes | 1iiC |
[ |
Randomized trial | HelixorA, IscadorM | Breast | 95; 34 (HelixorA) and 30 (IscadorM); 31 | No differences in the primary outcome between groups | Yes | 1iiC |
[ |
Randomized controlled trial | PS76A (Lektin) | Breast | 352; 176; 176 | Improved QOL | Yes | 1iC |
[ |
Randomized trial | Lektinol | Breast | 261; 195; 66 | Improved QOL | Yes | 1iC |
[ |
Randomized trial | Lektinol | Breast | 352; 176; 176 | Improved QOL | Yes | 1iC |
[ |
Randomized trial | Isorel | Colorectal | 64; 50; 14 | Improved survival and tolerance to either adjuvant or palliative treatment | Yes | 1iiA |
[ |
Nonrandomized controlled trial | Isorel | Digestive tract | 70; 40; 30 | Enhanced cellular immunity and improved QOL | No | 2C |
[ |
Nonrandomized controlled trial | abnobaVISCUMQuercus | Metastatic colorectal | 25; 25; none | No objective tumor response | Yes | 2Diii |
[ |
Nonrandomized controlled trial | Viscum fraxini-2 | Hepatocellular carcinoma | 23; 23; none | Improved survival | No | 2Dii |
Current Clinical Trials
Use our
References:
Although a number of different mistletoe extracts have been used in human studies, the reported side effects have generally been minimal and not life threatening. Common side effects include the following:[
One meta-analysis using Viscum album L. and isolated mistletoe lectins included both animal and human studies. Doses and application forms varied. No immunosuppressive effects were reported. Side effects included local reactions at the injection site and flu-like symptoms such as fever, chills, fatigue, mild gastrointestinal symptoms, and headache. High doses of recombinantly-produced mistletoe lectins (not available in commercial products) resulted in reversible hepatotoxicity in some cases.[
A few cases of severe allergic reactions, including anaphylactic shock, have been reported.[
Although from an observational cohort study, three types of mistletoe (Iscador, Helixor, and abnobaVISCUM) that were given intratumorally, intravenously, or subcutaneously were found to be safe in a small group of cancer patients with autoimmune diseases such as Graves disease, Hashimoto thyroiditis, ulcerative colitis, psoriasis, and some rheumatic diseases.[
References:
To assist readers in evaluating the results of human studies of integrative, alternative, and complementary therapies for cancer, the strength of the evidence (i.e., the levels of evidence) associated with each type of treatment is provided whenever possible. To qualify for a level of evidence analysis, a study must:
Separate levels of evidence scores are assigned to qualifying human studies on the basis of statistical strength of the study design and scientific strength of the treatment outcomes (i.e., endpoints) measured. The resulting two scores are then combined to produce an overall score. For an explanation of the scores and additional information about levels of evidence analysis for cancer, see Levels of Evidence for Human Studies of Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies.
Mistletoe is one of the most widely studied complementary and alternative medicine therapies for cancer. In certain European countries, the preparations made from European mistletoe (Viscum album L.) are among the most prescribed drugs offered to cancer patients. Mistletoe extracts have been evaluated in numerous clinical studies and improvements in survival, quality of life, and/or stimulation of the immune system have been frequently reported. However, most clinical studies conducted have had one or more major weaknesses that raise doubts about the reliability of the findings. In addition, no evidence exists to support the notion that stimulation of the immune system by mistletoe leads to an improved ability to fight cancer. Because all patients in the reported clinical studies appear to have been adults, no information is available about the use of mistletoe as a treatment for children with cancer.
The PDQ cancer information summaries are reviewed regularly and updated as new information becomes available. This section describes the latest changes made to this summary as of the date above.
General Information
Revised text to state that although the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has regulatory authority over homeopathic drugs, this authority is usually not exercised unless the drugs are formulated for injection, such as the mistletoe product described in this summary.
Human/Clinical Studies
Added text about a retrospective analysis that investigated the effects of mistletoe and chemotherapy with hyperthermia versus mistletoe and chemotherapy in the palliative treatment of patients with pancreatic cancer. The results of the analysis found a significant improvement in survival rates in the patients who received all three treatments. Weaknesses of the analysis include the retrospective nature of the study, multiple types of chemotherapy and mistletoe regimens used, and the lack of a a study arm for hyperthermia and chemotherapy (cited Hohneck et al. as reference 38). Furthermore, the study was not stratified despite enrolling patients who were previously treated with 1 to 3 lines of therapy, making the group median survival rates clinically insignificant.
Revised Table 3 to include the Hohneck et al. study in the use of Iscador in cancer treatment: clinical reports describing therapeutic end points.
This summary is written and maintained by the
Purpose of This Summary
This PDQ cancer information summary for health professionals provides comprehensive, peer-reviewed, evidence-based information about the use of mistletoe extracts in the treatment of people with cancer. It is intended as a resource to inform and assist clinicians in the care of their patients. It does not provide formal guidelines or recommendations for making health care decisions.
Reviewers and Updates
This summary is reviewed regularly and updated as necessary by the
Board members review recently published articles each month to determine whether an article should:
Changes to the summaries are made through a consensus process in which Board members evaluate the strength of the evidence in the published articles and determine how the article should be included in the summary.
Any comments or questions about the summary content should be submitted to Cancer.gov through the NCI website's
Levels of Evidence
Some of the reference citations in this summary are accompanied by a level-of-evidence designation. These designations are intended to help readers assess the strength of the evidence supporting the use of specific interventions or approaches. The PDQ Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies Editorial Board uses a formal evidence ranking system in developing its level-of-evidence designations.
Permission to Use This Summary
PDQ is a registered trademark. Although the content of PDQ documents can be used freely as text, it cannot be identified as an NCI PDQ cancer information summary unless it is presented in its entirety and is regularly updated. However, an author would be permitted to write a sentence such as "NCI's PDQ cancer information summary about breast cancer prevention states the risks succinctly: [include excerpt from the summary]."
The preferred citation for this PDQ summary is:
PDQ® Integrative, Alternative, and Complementary Therapies Editorial Board. PDQ Mistletoe Extracts. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. Updated <MM/DD/YYYY>. Available at:
Images in this summary are used with permission of the author(s), artist, and/or publisher for use within the PDQ summaries only. Permission to use images outside the context of PDQ information must be obtained from the owner(s) and cannot be granted by the National Cancer Institute. Information about using the illustrations in this summary, along with many other cancer-related images, is available in
Disclaimer
The information in these summaries should not be used as a basis for insurance reimbursement determinations. More information on insurance coverage is available on Cancer.gov on the
Contact Us
More information about contacting us or receiving help with the Cancer.gov website can be found on our
Last Revised: 2024-06-13
This information does not replace the advice of a doctor. Ignite Healthwise, LLC, disclaims any warranty or liability for your use of this information. Your use of this information means that you agree to the
Healthwise, Healthwise for every health decision, and the Healthwise logo are trademarks of Ignite Healthwise, LLC.
Individual and family medical and dental insurance plans are insured by Cigna Health and Life Insurance Company (CHLIC), Cigna HealthCare of Arizona, Inc., Cigna HealthCare of Illinois, Inc., Cigna HealthCare of Georgia, Inc., Cigna HealthCare of North Carolina, Inc., Cigna HealthCare of South Carolina, Inc., and Cigna HealthCare of Texas, Inc. Group health insurance and health benefit plans are insured or administered by CHLIC, Connecticut General Life Insurance Company (CGLIC), or their affiliates (see
All insurance policies and group benefit plans contain exclusions and limitations. For availability, costs and complete details of coverage, contact a licensed agent or Cigna sales representative. This website is not intended for residents of New Mexico.