Cited by 160Phytochemistry and Bioactive CompoundsPhytochemical Studies and BioactivitiesBreast Cancer Treatment Studies

Is digitalis a therapy for breast carcinoma?

Stenkvist, B·1999·Oncology Reports

Abstract

We have previously reported effects on breast carcinoma by digitalis on patients in vivo with significant effects on cytometric features and recurrence rate. Increased attention is now paid to the anti-proliferative and apoptosis inducing effect on cancer cells in vitro by glycosides from foxglove as well as by some other glycosides. The present study is a long-term follow-up (22.3 years) of 175 patients with breast carcinoma, of which 32 were on digitalis treatment, when they acquired their breast carcinoma. There was a lower death rate (6%) from breast carcinoma among the patients on digitalis, when compared with patients not on digitalis (34%). Also proliferation/aneuploidy was less pronounced of the tumors in patients on digitalis. These observations were statistically significant although the statistical analysis was hampered in the life-table analysis by the fact that only 2/32 patients on digitalis died from breast cancer. Serious consideration should be given to the effects of digitalis derivatives on cancer cells in cancer drug design. This field of research is not sufficiently explored and holds promise to contain drugs superior to present-day adjuvant therapy both with respect to effects and side-effects.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3892/or.6.3.493

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Long-term follow-up of 175 breast cancer patients who were taking digitalis preparations revealed a 6% death rate compared to 34% in those who were not on digitalis treatment.

    “Long-term follow-up of 175 breast cancer patients who were taking digitalis preparations revealed a 6% death rate compared to 34% in those who were not on digitalis treatment (32).”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

Cited by 160

Authors
Stenkvist, B.
Affiliations
Uppsala University (SE)
Corresponding author
Stenkvist, B
Venue
Oncology Reports
Published
1999-05-01
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
493-6
ISSN
  • 1021-335X (ISSN-L)
  • 1791-2431
OpenAlex
W2083395646
Cited by
160
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 14
FWCI
5.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Oncology Reports (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (N01-CB-53968)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Biomaterials › Phytochemistry and Bioactive Compounds
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Phytochemical Studies and Bioactivities
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
Keywords
digitalis, breast cancer, glycosides, foxglove, antiproliferative activity, apoptosis, tumor recurrence, long-term follow-up, cancer mortality, aneuploidy, anticancer drug design, adjuvant therapy
MeSH terms
Antineoplastic Agents, Breast Neoplasms, Cardiotonic Agents, Combined Modality Therapy, Digitalis Glycosides, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Prognosis, Prospective Studies, Tamoxifen, Case-Control Studies, Radiotherapy, Adjuvant, Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review