Skip to content

Study · Measured the body's own peptide · 2018

1 result

Immunological and Quality-of-Life Profiles in Women with Breast Cancer: Complementary versus Conventional Care.

Hamrin E, Ernerudh J, Rosén A

Complementary medicine research27 Aug 2018

PMID30145583 (opens in a new tab)DOI10.1159/000490049 (opens in a new tab)PepBankPUB-30145583
Source linkPubMedAsk about this study
Jump to 1 result

Summary

The text of this summary is not shown here, because the article license does not allow reuse. Read it at the source (opens in a new tab)

Text rights: Publisher copyright. Results still quote short attributed sentences.

Results from this study1

No result from this study comes from a test of the peptide.

Natural levels measured1

These results measure the body's own peptide. Nobody was given the peptide. They are not evidence about taking it. They are left out of key results, evidence counts and charts.

  1. 01HumanEndogenous levelObservational studyOther

    In women with breast cancer, the body's own oxytocin level showed no major difference over time between anthroposophic and conventional care.

    In plain wordsIn women with breast cancer, the body's own oxytocin levels did not differ much between anthroposophic care and conventional care.

    Peptide
    Oxytocin
    Outcome
    No significant changeOxytocin level over 6 months
    Study

    n = 52

    Comparator
    Conventional care
    Outcome group
    Immune response · Immune and inflammation

    Source sentences

    Summary
    No major differences were observed in other immunological parameters
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    Fourteen immunological variables, including leukocyte count, lymphocyte count, activated T cells (CD4+ and CD8+), NK cells, B cells, IL1β, IL6, IL10, and oxytocin, were longitudinally analyzed in both groups (n = 2 × 26).

    This result measures the body's own Oxytocin. Nobody was given the peptide. It is not evidence about taking it.

AI wrote and checked these results. AI can make mistakes, so check important results against the source.

Version history

PepBank keeps every version of the data on this study. Status changes from Retraction Watch, Europe PMC and Crossref are listed with their source.

  1. Version 2Current

    11 Oct 2026, 01:30 UTC

    Study results updated

  2. Version 1

    9 Oct 2026, 02:50 UTC

    First added · source update from Europe PMC

Subjects

Terms as the source lists them.

PepBank is a research reference. Talk to a doctor before you use any peptide.