ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2022
Efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine for the treatment of pancreatic cancer: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Burden of Pancreatic Cancer in Five East Asian Countries From 1990 to 2021 and Its Prediction up to 2036: A Systemic Analysis of the Global Burden of Diseases Study 2021.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Identification of Syndrome Types in Patients With Pancreatic Cancer From Free Text in Electronic Medical Records: Model Development and Validation.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Assessment of the reliability and quality of pancreatic cancer related short videos on mainstream platforms: cross-sectional study.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Advances in the treatment of pancreatic cancer with traditional Chinese medicine.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pancreatic cancer is a highly malignant tumor with poor prognosis. Currently available Western medical management strategies are unable to prolong the survival time and reduce the mortality of patients with pancreatic cancer. Traditional Chinese medicine has achieved promising results in many clinical studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SR/MA) aimed to explore the benefits and evaluate the quality of evidence of traditional Chinese medicine-based interventions for preventing and treating pancreatic cancer. A systematic search of eight databases for SRs/MAs of randomized controlled trials on traditional Chinese medicine treatment for pancreatic cancer was conducted (from inception to April 2022). The methodological quality of the SRs/MAs was assessed using AMSTAR 2.0, and the quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE guide. Nine SRs/MAs, including 145 randomized controlled trials, were considered eligible for this study. The literature were published between 2014 and 2022. The sample size of randomized controlled trials in the MAs ranged from 336 to 1,989. The methodological quality of the nine studies was critically low. Among the 59 outcome indicators of the nine SRs/MAs, seven, 33, and 19 had moderate-, low-, and critically low-quality evidence, respectively, while high-quality evidence was not identified. The results for the long-term indicators, short-term indicators, and adverse reactions in the SRs/MAs displayed consistencies and differences. In conclusion, the methodological and evidence quality of the current evidence is generally low, highlighting the need for additional focus on implementation processes. Some evidence with moderate quality validated that several specific traditional Chinese medicine were optimum for improving the short-term clinical efficacy. However, more objective and high-quality investigations are warranted to verify the efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine for pancreatic cancer.
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.