ArticleDrug design, development and therapy2016
Clinical study in genital herpes: natural Gene-Eden-VIR/Novirin versus acyclovir, valacyclovir, and famciclovir.
Article in Drug design, development and therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Trial of Herbal Treatment Gene-Eden-VIR/Novirin in Oral Herpes.Journal of evidence-based integrative medicineTrial
- Flavonoids with Anti-Herpes Simplex Virus Properties: Deciphering Their Mechanisms in Disrupting the Viral Life Cycle.Viruses · 2023Review
- Anti-CMV therapy, what next? A systematic review.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- High Preventive Effect of G2-S16 Anionic Carbosilane Dendrimer against Sexually Transmitted HSV-2 Infection.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Human papillomavirus (HPV): systemic treatment with Gene-Eden-VIR/Novirin safely and effectively clears virus.Drug design, development and therapy · 2017Observational
- Clinical study of Gene-Eden-VIR/Novirin in genital herpes: suppressive treatment safely decreases the duration of outbreaks in both severe and mild cases.Clinical and translational 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis paper reports the results of a clinical study that tested the effect of suppressive treatment with the botanical product Gene-Eden-VIR/Novirin on the number of genital herpes outbreaks. The results in this study were compared to those published in clinical studies of acyclovir, valacyclovir, and famciclovir.
methodsThe framework was a retrospective chart review. The population included 139 participants. The treatment was one to four capsules of Gene-Eden-VIR/Novirin per day. The duration of treatment was 2-48 months. The study included three controls recommended by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA): baseline, no treatment, and dose response.
resultsThe treatment decreased the number of outbreaks per year in 90.8% of the participants. The treatment also decreased the mean number of outbreaks per year from 7.27 and 5.5 in the control groups to 2.39 (P<0.0001 and P<0.001, respectively). The treated participants reported no adverse experiences. Out of the 15 tests that compared Gene-Eden-VIR/Novirin to the three drugs, Gene-Eden-VIR/Novirin had superior efficacy in eight tests, inferior efficacy in three tests, and comparable efficacy in four tests. Gene-Eden-VIR/Novirin also had superior safety.
conclusionThe clinical study showed that the natural Gene-Eden-VIR/Novirin decreases the number of genital herpes outbreaks without any side effects. The study also showed that the clinical effects reported in this study are mostly better than those reported in the reviewed studies of acyclovir, valacyclovir, and famciclovir.
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.