↓ Skip to main content

Intravenous Vitamin C and Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Integrative Cancer Therapies, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#28 of 1,009)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
55 X users
patent
18 patents
facebook
26 Facebook pages
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages
reddit
9 Redditors
video
2 YouTube creators

Readers on

mendeley
267 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Intravenous Vitamin C and Cancer
Published in
Integrative Cancer Therapies, May 2014
DOI 10.1177/1534735414534463
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Background. Intravenous vitamin C (IVC) is a contentious adjunctive cancer therapy, widely used in naturopathic and integrative oncology settings. We conducted a systematic review of human interventional and observational studies assessing IVC for use in cancer patients. Methods. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and AMED from inception to April 2013 for human studies examining the safety, effectiveness, or pharmacokinetics of IVC use in cancer patients. Results. Of 897 records, a total of 39 reports of 37 studies were included: 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 15 uncontrolled trials, 6 observational studies, and 14 case reports. IVC dosing ranged from 1 g to more than 200 g ascorbic acid per infusion, typically administered 2 to 3 times weekly. IVC does not appear to increase toxicity or interfere with antitumor effects of gemcitabine/erlotinib therapy or paclitaxel and carboplatin. Based on 1 RCT and data from uncontrolled human trials, IVC may improve time to relapse and possibly enhance reductions in tumor mass and improve survival in combination with chemotherapy. IVC may improve quality of life, physical function, and toxicities associated with chemotherapy, including fatigue, nausea, insomnia, constipation, and depression. Case reports document several instances of tumor regression and long-term disease-free survival associated with use of IVC. Conclusion. There is limited high-quality clinical evidence on the safety and effectiveness of IVC. The existing evidence is preliminary and cannot be considered conclusive but is suggestive of a good safety profile and potentially important antitumor activity; however, more rigorous evidence is needed to conclusively demonstrate these effects. IVC may improve the quality of life and symptom severity of patients with cancer, and several cases of cancer remission have been reported. Well-designed, controlled studies of IVC therapy are needed.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 55 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 267 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Croatia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 259 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 13%
Student > Bachelor 33 12%
Researcher 26 10%
Other 22 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 8%
Other 49 18%
Unknown 80 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 87 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 3%
Other 33 12%
Unknown 88 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 74. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 October 2026.
All research outputs
#739,187
of 34,598,043 outputs
Outputs from Integrative Cancer Therapies
#28
of 1,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,502
of 274,333 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Integrative Cancer Therapies
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,598,043 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,009 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,333 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them