SynthesisPloS one2018
Oral administration of herbal medicines for radiation pneumonitis in lung cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevention and Treatment of Radiation-Induced Esophagitis With Oral Herbal Medicine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Integrative cancer therapiesPooled it
- The Efficacy and Safety of Acupuncture for Preventing Radiation Pneumonitis in Patients With Lung Cancer: A Prospective, Single-Blinded, Randomized Pilot Proof-of-Principle Study.Integrative cancer therapiesTrial
- Serum Pharmacochemistry and Network Pharmacology Reveal Active Compounds and Mechanisms of the Huaxian Formula in Alleviating Radiation-Induced Pulmonary Fibrosis.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Article
- Treatment of Lung Cancer with Orally Administered Chinese Herbal Medicine: An Evidence Map between 1970-2020.Chinese journal of integrative medicine · 2022Review
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRadiation pneumonitis is a common and serious complication of radiotherapy. Many published randomized controlled studies (RCTs) reveal a growing trend of using herbal medicines as adjuvant therapy to prevent radiation pneumonitis; however, their efficacy and safety remain unexplored.
objectiveThe aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of herbal medicines as adjunctive therapy for the prevention of radiation pneumonitis in patients with lung cancer who undergo radiotherapy.
methodsWe searched the following 11 databases: three English medical databases [MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL)], five Korean medical databases (Korean Studies Information, Research information Service System, KoreaMed, DBPIA, National Digital Science Library), and three Chinese medical databases [the China National Knowledge Database (CNKI), Journal Integration Platform (VIP), and WanFang Database]. The primary outcome was the incidence of radiation pneumonitis. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.
resultsTwenty-two RCTs involving 1819 participants were included. The methodological quality was poor for most of the studies. Meta-analysis showed that herbal medicines combined with radiotherapy significantly reduced the incidence of radiation pneumonitis (n = 1819; RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.45-0.63, I2 = 8%) and the incidence of severe radiation pneumonitis (n = 903; RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.11-0.41, I2 = 0%). Combined therapy also improved the Karnofsky performance score (n = 420; WMD 4.62, 95% CI 1.05-8.18, I2 = 82%).
conclusionThere is some encouraging evidence that oral administration of herbal medicines combined with radiotherapy may benefit patients with lung cancer by preventing or minimizing radiation pneumonitis. However, due to the poor methodological quality of the identified studies, definitive conclusion could not be drawn. To confirm the merits of this approach, further rigorously designed large scale trials are warranted.
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.