Vandecasteele, K., Ost, P., Oosterlinck, W., Fonteyne, V., Neve, W. D., & Meerleer, G. D. (2012). Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of salvia officinalis in controlling hot flashes in prostate cancer patients treated with androgen deprivation. Phytotherapy Research: PTR, 26(2), 208-213.
The study measured the efficacy and side effects of treatment with salvia officinalis for hot flashes in men with prostate cancer treated with androgen deprivation.
Salvia officinalis extract was provided in 150 mg tablets to be taken 3 times daily. Thujone was confirmed to be absent from the product. Patients were to complete a hot flash diary daily. Patients were seen in clinic every 1-2 weeks for 10 weeks at which time they turned in diaries, received a new supply of the salvia tablets, and had a clinical examination and bloodwork.
Nine men, with a mean age of 68 years (range 62-73), were enrolled. All had prostate cancer, were receiving androgen deprivation therapy, and were experiencing hot flashes. Patients were excluded if they were unlikely to comply with the protocol or had an uncooperative attitude
PHASE OF CARE: Transition phase after active treatment
This was a quasiexperimental feasibility study.
Salvia use reduced hot flashes from a pretreatment mean Moyad score of 112 to a posttreatment mean of 54 (p = .002). There was a decrease in LH and FSH levels. There were no significant effects on testosterone, blood pressure, or cholesterol levels. Hot flash reduction appeared within the first 3 weeks. After this time, Moyad scores were essentially stable. Sub-group analysis of 8 patients who had at least grade 2 hot flashes at baseline showed a substantial variability of responses. One patient developed a skin rash that may have been associated with the use of salvia
Salvia officinalis was associated with reduction in hot flash scores and minimal side effects in this small pilot study.
This study provides little information to support use of salvia officinalis for hot flashes in these patients. The sample size is too small and study design insufficient to examine potential efficacy and the actual side effect profile of this intervention. Larger, well-designed clinical trials are needed.