SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
Efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine decoctions in breast cancer treatment: a network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Breast cancer is the most common malignant tumor among women globally. While traditional treatments are effective, they are associated with numerous side effects. In recent years, traditional Chinese herbal decoctions have garnered attention as adjunctive therapeutic approaches. This study employs a network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of various Chinese herbal decoctions in breast cancer treatment. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wan fang, and VIP databases for randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of different Chinese herbal decoctions in breast cancer patients, up to 20 December 2025. Quality assessment was performed using the Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Network meta-analysis was conducted using R 4.5.1. Results: A total of 68 articles involving 4,708 patients were included, meta-analysis results suggest that compared with the control group, for objective response rate YHHYT [OR = 4.76, 95%CrI (1.25, 25)] ranked first in cumulative probability (81.42%). Regarding disease control rate, BZT demonstrated an [OR = 5.77, 95%CrI (1.59, 29)] and ranked first in cumulative probability (74.66%). For CD4+/CD8+, FJHQT [MD= MD = 0.69, 95%CrI (0.2, 1.17)] achieved an 88.00% cumulative probability ranking, finally, regarding nausea and vomiting relief BZT [OR = 0.25, 95%CrI (0.1, 0.57)] ranked first in cumulative probability (75.67%). Conclusions: This study employed a network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of multiple Chinese herbal decoctions in breast cancer treatment. Results demonstrated that these decoctions exhibited significant therapeutic effects in enhancing target response rates, disease control rates, and immune function (CD4+/CD8+ ratio) among breast cancer patients, while also alleviating chemotherapy side effects such as nausea and vomiting. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261279914, identifier CRD420261279914.
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.