Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38485112›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open ophthalmology2024

Saffron therapy for the ongoing treatment of age-related macular degeneration.

Geoffrey K Broadhead, John Grigg, Peter J McCluskey, Thomas Hong, Timothy E Schlub, Eugenia Chu, Andrew A Chang

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. DoesJournal of evidence-based integrative medicine
    Pooled it
  2. Adverse Events of Saffron (Health science reports · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Different Therapeutic Approaches for Dry and Wet AMD.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2024
    Review
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Geoffrey K BroadheadThe University of Sydney, Save Sight Institute, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1351-4513
John GriggThe University of Sydney, Save Sight Institute, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6763-8119
Peter J McCluskeyThe University of Sydney, Save Sight Institute, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Thomas HongSydney Retina Clinic, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Timothy E SchlubThe University of Sydney School of Public Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Eugenia ChuSydney Retina Clinic, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Andrew A ChangThe University of Sydney, Save Sight Institute, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia achang@sydneyretina.com.au.ORCID 0000-0001-7555-1585
The University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the long-term efficacy and safety of oral saffron, a natural antioxidant, in treating mild/moderate age-related macular degeneration (AMD). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Open-label, extension trial of 93 adults (>50 years) with mild/moderate AMD and vision >20/70 Snellen equivalent in at least 1 eye. Exclusion criteria included confounding visual lesions or significant gastrointestinal disease impairing absorption.Participants were given oral saffron supplementation (20 mg/day) for 12 months. Those already consuming Age-Related Eye Diseases Study (AREDS) supplements or equivalent maintained these.Primary outcomes included changes in multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG) response density and latency, and changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Secondary outcomes included safety outcomes, changes in mfERG and BCVA among participants on AREDS supplements and changes in microperimetry.

resultsAt 12 months, mean mfERG response density was significantly higher in rings 1, 2 and overall (p<0.001 for all) but not in rings 3-6, and there was no difference in response between those taking AREDS supplements and those not (p>0.05). Mean mfERG latency was not significantly different in any of rings 1-6 or overall (p>0.05 for all), again with no difference between those taking AREDS supplements or not (p>0.05). Mean BCVA was 1.6 letters worse (p<0.05) with no difference between those on AREDS supplements or not, and this may have been related to cataract progression. No saffron-related serious adverse events were detected.

conclusionSaffron supplementation modestly improved mfERG responses in participants with AMD, including those using AREDS supplements. Given the chronic nature of AMD, longer-term supplementation may produce greater benefits.

Indexed as

CrocusMacular DegenerationAntioxidantsDietary SupplementsHumansVisual AcuityAntioxidantsClinical TrialDegenerationMacula

Identifiers

PMID38485112
PMCPMC10941132
OpenAlexW4392820497

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.