SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2024
Efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine
Synthesis in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Chinese Herbal Medicine in the Treatment of Chronic Kidney Disease: A Narrative Review of Mechanisms and Therapeutic Potential.Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPRReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: IgA nephropathy (IgAN), a condition posing a significant threat to public health, currently lacks a specific treatment protocol. Research has underscored the potential benefits of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) for treating IgAN. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of various intervention strategies, such as combining TCM with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), lacks a comprehensive systematic comparison. Therefore, this study aimed to conduct a network meta-analysis to assess the clinical efficacy of ACEIs, ARBs, TCM, and their combinations in treating IgAN to offer novel insights and approaches for the clinical management of IgAN. Methods: A systematic review conducted until November 2023 included relevant literature from databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, CNKI, and Wanfang. Two independent researchers screened and assessed the data for quality. Network and traditional meta-analyses were performed using Stata 18.0 and RevMan 5.3 software, respectively. Outcome measures included 24-h urinary protein quantification (24 hpro), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), serum creatinine (Scr), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and adverse event incidence rates (ADRs). Forest plots, cumulative ranking probability curves (SUCRA), and funnel plots generated using Stata 18.0 facilitated a comprehensive analysis of intervention strategies' efficacy and safety. Results: This study included 72 randomized controlled trials, seven interventions, and 7,030 patients. Comparative analysis revealed that ACEI + TCM, ARB + TCM combination therapy, and TCM monotherapy significantly reduced the levels of 24 hpro, eGFR, Scr, and BUN compared to other treatment modalities ( Conclusion: The combination of ACEI or ARB with TCM demonstrated superior efficacy compared to ACEI/ARB monotherapy in the treatment of IgAN without any significant ADRs. Therefore, combination therapies can be used to enhance therapeutic outcomes based on individual patient circumstances, highlighting the use of TCM as a widely applicable approach in clinical practice. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023476674.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.