ArticleFrontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland)2026
Analysis of 386 alternative medicinal products implicated in liver injury reveal clinically relevant associations with potentially hepatotoxic botanicals, pharmaceutical adulteration, heavy metal contamination, and undisclosed animal content.
Article in Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2026. 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
Background: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM)-related hepatotoxicity is a growing global concern. We utilized multi-modal analysis to characterize CAM product safety and identify predictors of severe liver injury. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 386 CAM products from 91 consecutive patients (mean 4.2 products/patient) presenting with CAM-related adverse events at a tertiary center in South India (2021-2023). Product-level analyses characterize the CAM supply chain while patient-level analyses inform clinical outcome associations. Investigations included ingredient documentation, heavy metal quantification, and GC-MS compound profiling. Results: The mean patient age was 48.2 years (75.8% male). ACLF occurred in 39.6% of all patients (36/91) and 41.9% of those with hepatic adverse events (36/86), with associated mortality of 38.9% (14/36) compared to 10.9% (6/55) in non-ACLF presentations (OR 5.20, P = 0.004). Heavy metals exceeded WHO limits in many products: mercury (34%), cadmium (25%), arsenic (21%), and lead (14%). Cadmium exposure exceeding WHO limits showed a strong association with ACLF (75.9% vs 22.6%, P<0.001, FDR q<0.001). The association with mortality did not reach statistical significance after correction for multiple comparisons (34.5% vs 16.1%, uncorrected P = 0.061, FDR q=0.24). Undeclared pharmaceutical adulteration (at least one adulterant found in 27.7% of products; exposure to at least one adulterated product in 46.2% of patients) and animal-derived content (31.3%) were prevalent. Notably, unlabeled product consumption significantly predicted mortality (P = 0.025). Conclusion: CAM-associated liver injury frequently manifests as ACLF with high mortality, driven by pervasive heavy metal contamination and adulteration. Unlabeled product exposure is a strong mortality predictor, highlighting the urgent need for mandatory product surveillance.
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.