ReviewBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2013
Herbal hepatotoxicity: a critical review.
Review in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 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
35 citing papers in PubMed, 88 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of adverse event reports associated with complementary health products in Singapore from 2017 to 2023.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Exploring the Cancer Therapeutic Potential of Traditional Medicinal Plants by Modulating the Apoptotic Pathway.BioMed research international · 2026Review
- Beyond metabolism and blood flow: toward an inflammation-metabolism axis paradigm for herbal medicine in obesity-related coronary heart disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Preclinic evaluation of the safety of potential anticovid-19 phytomedicine: SAYE PLUS impacts on Wistar rat biochemical and histopathological parameters in sub-chronic toxicity study.BMC pharmacology & toxicology · 2025Article
- Acute Liver Injury Following Herbal Drink Consumption With Steatosis and Immune Activation: A Case Report.Cureus · 2025Article
- Herbal Interactions with Cardiac Medications: A Comprehensive Review of Potential Interactions between Herbal Drugs and Commonly Prescribed Cardiac Medications.Current drug safety · 2025Review
- A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies on the hepatoxicity induced by polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in rats and mice.Current research in toxicology · 2023Article
- Drug-induced liver injury: a comprehensive review.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Herb-Induced Liver Injury-A Challenging Diagnosis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Icariside Ⅱ, a main compound in Epimedii Folium, induces idiosyncratic hepatotoxicity by enhancing NLRP3 inflammasome activation.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2020Article
- Complementary and Alternative Medicine Practice Among Saudi Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of nephrology and renovascular disease · 2020Article
- Article
- Herbal or traditional medicine consumption in a Thai worker population: pattern of use and therapeutic control in chronic diseases.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2019Article
- A conjugated-polymer-based ratiometric nanoprobe for evaluating in-vivo hepatotoxicity induced by herbal medicine via MSOT imaging.Photoacoustics · 2019Article
- Efficacy of a Peruvian Botanical Remedy (Sabell A4+) for Treating Liver Disease and Protecting Gastric Mucosal Integrity.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2019Article
- In silico, in vitro: antioxidant and antihepatotoxic activity of gnetol fromBioImpacts : BI · 2019Article
- Review
- Safety evaluation of Bon-santé cleanserJournal of traditional and complementary medicine · 2018Article
- Adverse reactions to dietary supplements containing red yeast rice: assessment of cases from the Italian surveillance system.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2017Article
- Drug-induced liver injury associated with Complementary and Alternative Medicine: a review of adverse event reports in an Asian community from 2009 to 2014.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2016Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review deals with herbal hepatotoxicity, identical to herb induced liver injury (HILI), and critically summarizes the pitfalls associated with the evaluation of assumed HILI cases. Analysis of the relevant publications reveals that several dozens of different herbs and herbal products have been implicated to cause toxic liver disease, but major quality issues limit the validity of causality attribution. In most of these reports, discussions around quality specifications regarding herbal products, case data presentations and causality assessment methods prevail. Though the production of herbal drugs is under regulatory surveillance and quality aspects are normally not a matter of concern, low quality of the less regulated herbal supplements may be a critical issue considering product batch variability, impurities, adulterants and herb misidentifications. Regarding case data presentation, essential diagnostic information is often lacking, as is the use of valid and liver specific causality assessment methods that also consider alternative diseases. At present, causality is best assessed by using the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences scale ( CIOMS) in its original or updated form, which should primarily be applied prospectively by the treating physician when evaluating a patient rather than retrospectively by regulatory agencies. To cope with these problems, a common quality approach by manufacturers, physicians and regulatory agencies should strive for the best quality. We propose steps for improvements with impact on future cases of liver injury by herbs, herbal drugs and herbal supplements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.