Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31320914›Full record

ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2019

Traditional Chinese Medicine Preparation Combined Therapy May Improve Chemotherapy Efficacy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Jiaming Wu, Yun Liu, Cantu Fang, Lixian Zhao, Lizhu Lin, Liming Lu

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Beneficial Actions ofNutrients · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jiaming WuZhongshan Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine (Zhongshan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine), Zhongshan 528400, China.
Yun LiuSouth China Research Center for Acupuncture and Moxibustion, Medical College of Acu-Moxi and Rehabilitation, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510006, China.
Cantu FangZhongshan Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine (Zhongshan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine), Zhongshan 528400, China.
Lixian ZhaoGuangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510000, China.
Lizhu LinThe First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510000, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0134-1435
Liming LuClinical Research Center, South China Research Center for Acupuncture and Moxibustion, Medical College of Acu-Moxi and Rehabilitation, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510000, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7821-4699
Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhether traditional Chinese medicine preparation combined therapy can improve the efficacy of chemotherapy is controversial. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine preparation combined with chemotherapy.

methodThree databases were searched from inception through August 2018. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving the combined treatment of chemotherapy and traditional Chinese medicine preparation compared to chemotherapy alone for treating cancer were retrieved. The methodological quality of the included RCTs was assessed with Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias assessment tool. Meta-analysis was adopted to make comprehensive comparisons between the experimental and control groups.

resultsFour RCTs were included in this review, comprising 256 subjects. The majority of the RCTs were judged as being of poor methodological quality. Meta-analysis showed that the combination of traditional Chinese medicine preparation and chemotherapy appeared to be more effective than chemotherapy alone, for the treatment of cancer, as assessed by the disease control rate (RR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.11 to 1.79) and the objective response rate (RR: 2.71, 95% CI: 1.28 to 5.77). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of bone marrow suppression (RR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.57 to 1.37) or gastrointestinal reaction (RR: 1.12, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.69).

conclusionsTraditional Chinese medicine preparation combined with chemotherapy may improve objective response rates and disease control rates more than chemotherapy alone. The evidence that combined traditional Chinese medicine preparation can reduce the side effects of chemotherapy is insufficient. More rigorous randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these conclusions.

Identifiers

PMID31320914
PMCPMC6610742
OpenAlexW2949770870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.