ArticleMedicine2025
Efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine combined with immunomodulators in treating erosive oral lichen planus: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of various Chinese herbal medicines combined with immunomodulators (IMM) in the treatment of erosive oral lichen planus (EOLP) through a network meta-analysis.
methodsA total of 21 randomized controlled trials involving 1762 patients were included. Relevant randomized controlled trials were retrieved from 9 major electronic databases. All data were analyzed using a random-effects model. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was employed to rank the treatment regimens based on efficacy and clinical significance. To validate the robustness of the results, publication bias was assessed using funnel plots, and inconsistency tests were performed to compare direct and indirect effects. League tables were used to visualize comparative effects between treatments. Contribution plots were generated to evaluate the influence of individual treatments on the overall network effects. Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA 16.0 (StataCorp LLC, College Station), and study quality was assessed with Review Manager 5.4 (The Cochrane Collaboration, London, UK).
resultsThe combination of Kouyanqing granules and IMM (KYQ+IMM) demonstrated the highest efficacy in terms of response rate (SUCRA 82.7%) and pain relief (SUCRA 90.8%). Compound Danshen preparation combined with IMM (CDF+IMM) and Jiedu Yukou decoction combined with IMM (JDYK+IMM) ranked second and third, respectively. Total glucosides of peony showed the lowest recurrence risk (SUCRA 94.3%), while Kangfuxin solution combined with IMM (KFX+IMM) exhibited the most significant improvement in erosion area (SUCRA 86.4%). All treatment regimens were well-tolerated, with a low incidence of adverse events.
conclusionThis study demonstrates that integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine regimens exhibit superior efficacy in improving response rates, pain relief, recurrence rates, and erosion healing in EOLP, with favorable safety profiles. Notably, KYQ+IMM, CDF+IMM, and KFX+IMM stand out as optimal therapeutic strategies, providing robust evidence for optimizing EOLP treatment.
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.