SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Effectiveness and safety of Shengxuening for treatment of renal anemia: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The pathological mechanisms and potential therapeutic strategies for renal anemia.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Shengxuening (SXN) in treating renal anemia by systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, the ClinicalTrials.gov, SinoMed, the China Knowledge Network, the Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform and Technology Journal Database were searched from inception to September 2024 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared SXN and other drugs or placebo in treating renal anemia. We used the Cochrane Bias Risk Tool to evaluate the risk of bias of all included RCTs, and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. Results: 31 RCTs involving 2,372 patients were included. The efficiency of SXN was superior than the control group (included placebo group, other drugs group) in improving hemoglobin (compared with placebo: MD: 7.15 g/L, 95% CI: 5.68-8.62, P < 0.001, GRADE: high; compared with other drugs: MD: 6.49 g/L, 95% CI: 3.50-9.47, P < 0.001, GRADE: very low), serum ferritin (MD: 57.53 ng/mL, 95% CI: 29.70-85.36, P < 0.001, GRADE: moderate; MD: 28.96 ng/mL, 95% CI: 1.88-56.04, P = 0.04, GRADE: moderate) and transferrin saturation level (MD: 7.00%, 95% CI: 3.40-10.60, P = 0.0001, GRADE: moderate; MD: 3.64%, 95% CI: 1.41-5.88, P = 0.001, GRADE: moderate). Besides, the efficiency of SXN combined with other drugs was superior than other drugs group in improving hemoglobin (MD: 11.95 g/L, 95% CI: 6.19-17.71, P < 0.001, GRADE: moderate), serum ferritin (MD: 53.43 ng/mL, 95% CI: 20.65-86.21, P = 0.001, GRADE: moderate) and transferrin saturation level (MD: 5.91%, 95% CI: 3.72-8.10, P < 0.001, GRADE: moderate). Additionally, the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in the SXN group was lower than that in other drugs treatment group (OR: 0.20, 95%CI: 0.12-0.33, P < 0.00001). Conclusion: The efficacy of SXN in treating renal anemia is convincing. Compared with other drugs, SXN is comparable or even better in treating renal anemia. Additionally, the safety of SXN is also relatively high.
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.