Trial reportScientific reports2025
Safety and efficacy of oral administrated cepharanthine in non-hospitalized, asymptomatic or mild COVID-19 patients: a Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial : Author detials.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05398705 (An Interventional Efficacy and Safety, Phase 2, Double-blind, 3-arm Study to Investigate Orally Administered High/Low-dose Cepharanthine Compared With Placebo in Nonhospitalized Asymptomatic or Mild Adult Participants With COVID-19), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
An Interventional Efficacy and Safety, Phase 2, Double-blind, 3-arm Study to Investigate Orally Administered High/Low-dose Cepharanthine Compared With Placebo in Nonhospitalized Asymptomatic or Mild Adult Participants With COVID-19
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Direct visualization of RNA virus and evaluation of drug effect in living cells by catalytically transformable DNA cube.Science advances · 2026Article
- Ethnobotanical study on medicinal plants used by Jinuo people in Yunnan, China.Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine · 2026Article
- Usambarensine fromACS omega · 2026Article
- Long-term outcomes of mild coronavirus disease 2019: Pulmonary function, exercise capacity, and quality of life.The Journal of international medical research · 2025Article
- Prognostic Value of Erythrogram Indicators and C-Reactive Protein Levels in Predicting Outcomes of Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Cepharanthine may inhibit the proliferation of prostate cells by blocking the EGFR/PI3K/AKT signaling pathway: comprehensive network analysis, molecular docking, and experimental evaluation.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cepharanthine (CEP) is a natural remedy that potently inhibits SARS-CoV-2 activity both in vitro and in vivo. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of CEP compared with placebo in adults with asymptomatic or mild coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), we conducted a proof-of-concept, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Patients were randomized to receive 120 mg/day of CEP, 60 mg/day CEP or placebo for 5 days. Main outcome was the time from randomization to negative nasopharyngeal swab and safety. Among 262 randomized participants, 188 completed the trial among group of 120 mg/day CEP (n = 65), 60 mg/day CEP (n = 68) and placebo (n = 55). Neither 120 mg/day or 60 mg/day CEP shortened the time to negative significantly compared with placebo. However, 60 mg/day CEP showed a slight trend (difference=-0.77 days, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.40, 95% CI 0.97-2.01, p = 0.072). In analysis of participants with good medication compliance, 60 mg/day CEP significantly shortened the time to negative (difference=-0.87 days, HR = 1.56, 95% CI 1.03-2.37, p = 0.035). Adverse events were not different among the three groups, and no serious adverse events occurred. In conclusion, treatment of asymptomatic or mild Covid-19 with 120 mg/day or 60 mg/day did not shorten the time to negative significantly. However, 60 mg/day CEP showed a slight trend which needs future confirmatory trials to validate. (NCT05398705).
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.