SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2025
Therapeutic effect of traditional Chinese medicine on diabetic sarcopenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical studies.
Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Traditional Chinese Medicine for Diabetic Sarcopenia: A Review and Its Related Mechanisms.Journal of diabetes research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Diabetic sarcopenia (DS) is an emerging complication of diabetes. Although clinical treatment options remain inadequate, preliminary evidence suggests that Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) holds therapeutic promise. This study aims to systematically evaluate the existing preclinical evidence for TCM treatments in diabetic sarcopenia. Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of animal studies investigating TCM interventions for DS. The initial literature search cutoff date was June 2024, with an updated search conducted during manuscript revision in November 2025. The search covered all records from seven databases from their inception to November 2025. Data analysis is performed using Review Manager 5.3 software. A fixed-effect model was selected when heterogeneity among studies was insignificant (P ≥ 0.1 or I² ≤ 50%); otherwise, a random-effects model was used. The robustness of the primary outcomes was assessed through sensitivity analysis. Publication bias was evaluated using Egger's test and funnel plots. Additionally, meta-regression was employed to explore potential sources of heterogeneity.This study has been registered on the PROSPERO platform (Registration Number: CRD42024596404). Results: The meta-analysis demonstrated that TCM intervention significantly increased gastrocnemius muscle weight [SMD = 1.85, 95% CI (1.07, 2.63), P < 0.00001] and muscle cross-sectional area [SMD = 2.68, 95% CI (1.63, 3.73), P < 0.00001], while improving muscle tissue morphology and grip strength [SMD = 1.57, 95% CI (0.49, 2.65), P = 0.004]. Notably, TCM exerted a bidirectional regulatory effect on body weight: significantly increasing it in diabetic cachexia models [SMD = 0.73, P = 0.02] while reducing it in obesity with sarcopenia models [SMD = -1.97, P < 0.00001]. A significant reduction in blood glucose levels was also observed [SMD = -3.13, P < 0.00001]. Mechanistically, preclinical evidence suggests that specific TCM interventions may modulate protein turnover homeostasis, potentially by activating the IGF1-PI3K-Akt-mTOR synthetic pathway and inhibiting the FoxO/Ubiquitin-Proteasome degradation pathway, alongside optimizing the pathological microenvironment. Conclusion: Current preclinical evidence suggests that specific TCM interventions may show potential in alleviating Diabetic Sarcopenia in animal models by improving muscle mass, strength, and metabolic function. Certain formulations appeared to exhibit a bidirectional regulation of body weight, which may reflect a context-dependent metabolic impact. However, due to the prevalent lack of blinding and allocation concealment in the included studies, the reported efficacy may be systematically overestimated. Consequently, current evidence remains preliminary. Future research must strictly adhere to ARRIVE guidelines and standardize interventions to generate robust preclinical data, paving the way for high-quality clinical trials. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD4202459640.
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.