ReviewShanghai archives of psychiatry2016
Huperzine A for treatment of cognitive impairment in major depressive disorder: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Shanghai archives of psychiatry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Natural Molecules for Brain Health and Resilience.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Post stroke depression: pathogenesis and molecular mechanisms of natural product-based interventions.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Mathematical algorithm-based identification of the functional components and mechanisms in depression treatment: An example of Danggui-Shaoyao-San.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Article
- Acetylcholinesterase Inhibitors in the Treatment of Neurodegenerative Diseases and the Role of Acetylcholinesterase in their Pathogenesis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Dissolving microneedles for transdermal delivery of huperzine A for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease.Drug delivery · 2020Article
- Evidence and gap map of studies assessing the effectiveness of interventions for people with disabilities in low-and middle-income countries.Campbell systematic reviews · 2020Article
- Traditional Chinese Medicine in Depression Treatment: From Molecules to Systems.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcetylcholinesterase (AChE) inhibitors have been shown to be effective in treating cognitive impairment in animal models and in human subjects with major depressive disorder (MDD). Huperzine A (HupA), a Traditional Chinese Medicine derived from a genus of clubmosses known as Huperzineserrata, is a powerful AChE inhibitor that has been used as an adjunctive treatment for MDD, but no meta-analysis on HupA augmentation for MDD has yet been reported.
aimConduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTS) about HupA augmentation in the treatment of MDD to evaluate its efficacy and safety.
methodsTwo evaluators independently searched nine English-language and Chinese-language databases, selected relevant studies that met pre-determined inclusion criteria, extracted data about outcome and safety, and conducted quality assessments and data synthesis.
resultsThree low-quality RCTs (pooled n=238) from China were identified that compared monotherapy antidepressant treatment for depression versus combined treatment with antidepressants and HupA. Participants in the studies ranged from 16 to 60 years of age. The average duration of adjunctive antidepressant and HupA treatment in the studies was only 6.7 weeks. All three studies were open label and non-blinded, so their overall quality was judged as poor. Meta-analysis of the pooled sample found no significant difference in the improvement in depressive symptoms between the two groups (weighted mean difference: -1.90 (95%CI: -4.23, 0.44), p=0.11). However, the adjunctive HupA group did have significantly greater improvement than the antidepressant only group in cognitive functioning (as assessed by the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test and the Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised) and in quality of life. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse drug reactions between groups.
conclusionsThe data available on the effectiveness and safety of adjunctive treatment using HupA in patients with MDD who are receiving antidepressants is insufficient to arrive at a definitive conclusion about its efficacy and safety. Pooling of the data from three low-quality RCTs from China found no advantage of adjunctive HupA in the treatment of depressive symptoms, but adjunctive treatment with HupA was associated with a faster resolution of the cognitive symptoms that frequently accompany MDD.
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.