Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32904623›Full record

ReviewEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2020

Efficacy and Safety of Aidi Injection as an Adjuvant Therapy on Advanced Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Yihui Chai, Yunzhi Chen, Wen Li, Zhong Qin, Jie Gao, Zhibin Jiang, Yuhong Ge, Liancheng Guan, Mengzhi Zhang, Huaiquan Liu and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 44% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yihui ChaiDepartment of Preclinical Medicine, Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Yunzhi ChenDepartment of Preclinical Medicine, Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Wen LiDepartment of Preclinical Medicine, Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3975-3312
Zhong QinDepartment of Preclinical Medicine, Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Jie GaoDepartment of Preclinical Medicine, Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Zhibin JiangDepartment of Pharmacy, Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Yuhong GeDepartment of Preclinical Medicine, Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Liancheng GuanSecond Affiliated Hospital, Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Mengzhi ZhangDepartment of Preclinical Medicine, Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Huaiquan LiuDepartment of Preclinical Medicine, Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Haiyang YuDepartment of Preclinical Medicine, Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Qingxue WangDepartment of Preclinical Medicine, Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Changfu YangDepartment of Preclinical Medicine, Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0604-347X
Guizhou University · CNAffiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAidi injection (ADI) is being used widely for breast cancer in China. However, the efficacy and safety of it need to be summarized. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare ADI and non-ADI treatment for advanced breast cancer.

methodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, CNKI, SinoMed, and CENTRAL from inception to Jan 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with diagnosis of advanced breast cancer that compared the efficacy of ADI with non-ADI treatment. Two researchers screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated risk of bias separately. The primary outcomes were overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR). The secondary outcomes included the QOL, immune cells, and adverse events. Review Manager software was used for estimating risks of bias of included studies, data analysis, and plotting. The sensitivity analysis and the publication bias test were performed using the

resultsWe included 14 studies with 1006 patients diagnosed as advanced breast cancer in total. The pooled effect showed that ADI increased ORR in advanced BC patients as an add-on therapy with little heterogeneity (

conclusionThis meta-analysis suggested that based on the existing evidence, treatment with ADI significantly changed the ORR of patients with advanced BC and improved their quality of life with few side effects. However, more randomized trials involving larger samples should be considered, and detailed mechanisms are needed to be uncovered.

Identifiers

PMID32904623
PMCPMC7456485
OpenAlexW3018668824

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.