Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38412322›Full record

Trial reportAging2024

Exploration of the utility of different doses of Qingfei Dayuan granules: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Xiaoyun Zhu, Weinan Li, Yi Yang, Hengfei Li, Min Yang, Jilong Zhang, Xucheng Li, Guangjun Yan, Xiongfei Wu, Weijun Zhao and 5 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Aging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. 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

15 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Xiaoyun ZhuHubei University of Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, China.
Weinan LiHubei Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, China.
Yi YangHubei Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, China.
Hengfei LiHubei Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, China.
Min YangHubei University of Chinese Medicine, Department of Preventive Medicine, School of Basic Medicine, Wuhan, China.
Jilong ZhangWuhan NO.1 Hospital, Fever Clinic, Wuhan, China.
Xucheng LiWuhan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Emergency Department, Wuhan, China.
Guangjun YanJingzhou Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jingzhou, China.
Xiongfei WuPeople’s Hospital of Hanchuan, Department of Infectious Diseases, Hanchuan, China.
Weijun ZhaoYichang Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Respiratory Department, Yichang, China.
Mengdi CuiHubei University of Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, China.
Xi YangHubei University of Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, China.
Xinyu HuHubei University of Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, China.
Juan HuangHubei University of Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, China.
Yuanming BaHubei Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, China.
Hubei University of Chinese Medicine · CNHubei Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNSecond Hospital of Yichang · CNWuhan City Chinese Medicine Hospital · CNWuhan No.1 Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical studies have confirmed that Qingfei Dayuan (QFDY) granules are effective in the treatment of influenza and upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) caused by pulmonary heat-toxin syndrome (PHTS). Granules of Chinese medicine formulations have become a widely used dosage form in clinical practice. With the continuous optimization of extraction technology, the advantages of Chinese medicine granules have been gradually demonstrated, but the price of Chinese medicine granules is generally higher than that of traditional dosage forms of Chinese medicine, and we support the rational use of the appropriate dosage of QFDY for patients with these conditions. Therefore, we set up half of the conventional dose as the low dose group, and designed the three-arm study to rigorously compare the efficacy difference of low-dose QFDY, QFDY and the placebo group, with the expectation of providing scientific support for the rational selection of the dose and the safe and effective use of the medicine in clinical practice.

methodsWe recruited 108 patients with clinical diagnoses of influenza and URTIs caused by PHTS to receive treatment at six hospitals in Hubei, China. Using a centralized randomization system, patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1:1 ratio to the QFDY, low-dose QFDY, or placebo control groups to receive the corresponding drug, and the study physicians, subjects, outcome assessors, and statisticians were unaware of group assignments. The primary outcome was the time to complete fever relief. Secondary outcomes included the efficacy of Chinese medicine in alleviating signs and symptoms and the disappearance rate of individual symptoms. Adverse events were monitored throughout the trial.

resultsA total of 108 patients were recruited. A total of 106 patients were included in the full analysis set (FAS). In the FAS analysis, there was no statistically significant difference in baseline of the three groups before treatment (P > 0.05). 1. Regarding the median time to complete fever relief, the QFDY, low-dose QFDY and placebo groups had median times of 26 h, 40 h and 48 h, respectively. The QFDY group had a shorter time to complete fever relief than the placebo group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05), while the low-dose QFDY group had a shorter time than the placebo group, but the difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). 2. In terms of the total efficacy of Chinese medicine in alleviating symptoms at the end of three full days of treatment, as well as the cure rate of red and sore throat, stuffy and runny nose, and sneezing, QFDY and low-dose QFDY were superior to the placebo, and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.01). There was no statistical significance in the comparison between the QFDY group and the low-dose QFDY group (P > 0.05). 3. In terms of the headache cure rate after three full days of treatment, QFDY was superior to the placebo, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05), and there was no significant efficacy of low-dose QFDY. 4. Safety comparisons showed no serious adverse events and 30 minor adverse events, which were not clinically considered to be related to the drug and were not statistically significant.

conclusionsIn the treatment of patients with influenza and URTIs caused by PHTS, which are mainly characterized by clinical symptoms such as red and sore throat, stuffy and runny nose, and sneezing, when fever is not obvious or low-grade fever is present, the use of low-dose QFDY to simply alleviate the clinical symptoms is recommended and preferred. Moreover, with its good safety profile, QFDY can be used in the treatment of patients with influenza and URTIs caused by PHTS, which can effectively shorten the duration of fever, significantly increase the total efficacy of Chinese medicine in alleviating symptoms after 3 days of treatment, and accelerate the recovery of symptoms such as red and sore throat, stuffy and runny nose, sneezing, and headache, etc. Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.chictr.org.cn. TRIAL NUMBER: ChiCTR2100043449. Registered on 18 February 2021.

Indexed as

Drugs, Chinese HerbalInfluenza, HumanPharyngitisRespiratory Tract InfectionsFeverHeadacheHumansRhinorrheaSneezingTreatment OutcomedayuanDrugs, Chinese HerbalChinese medicine granulesdifferent dosesdose-effect relationshipQingfei Dayuan granulestrial

Identifiers

PMID38412322
PMCPMC10968682
OpenAlexW4392166538

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.