This is a common question, especially from people with "less common" diagnoses, i.e. "rarer"diseases. This is an example of a question that is perhaps more irrelevant than unanswerable.
Firstly, the traditional way that oncology classifies cancers is simply outdated...ie by the tissue of origin (breast cancer, colon cancer etc). It has been shown that when we look "under the hood" at the individual differences between cancers of exactly the same provenance, same stage, same histology, etc, there is almost nothing similar about them at all. Every person's cancer is different. And the cancer itself changes through time and space. The important thing is to understand the molecular pathways driving tumor progression, as well as the genetic characteristics that determine metabolic and signaling features of the tumor which, in turn, determine resistance or sensitivity to different interventions. This is the importance of personalized medicine.
Secondly, botanicals themselves are NOT drugs and their anticancer influence is based as much on affecting the terrain or host of the tumor or disease. Botanicals are complex, and operate in the body as molecular multitaskers, impacting several targets in several pathways simultaneously. What is important is matching the botanicals to the perturbations that underly the cancer in the individual. From that perspective, the particular cancer by name or tissue of origin is not necessarily of significant relevance.