ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Long-term efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine combined with chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of reconstructed individual patient data over 3 years.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: To evaluate the 3-year efficacy of combining traditional Chinese medicine with chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer, taking into account time-dependent survival effects. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following PRISMA guidelines, including randomized controlled trials and observational studies that compared chemotherapy plus traditional Chinese medicine with chemotherapy alone. Individual patient data were reconstructed from Kaplan-Meier curves. For the primary endpoints of overall survival and progression-free survival, one-stage analyses employed frailty Cox models when the proportional hazards assumption held; otherwise, Royston-Parmar models incorporating time-varying effects were used. Restricted mean survival time over 0-36 months was estimated, and a two-stage random-effects model was applied for sensitivity analysis. Results: Eighteen studies (12 RCTs and 6 cohort studies) were included, with individual patient data reconstructed from 15 overall survival and 7 progression-free survival curves. The proportional hazards assumption was violated for overall survival; time-varying modeling revealed significantly better overall survival with chemotherapy plus traditional Chinese medicine therapy, with a 3-year restricted mean survival time difference of 4.149 months. In the personalized treatment subgroup, CT + TCM showed a pronounced early survival benefit, a similar benefit was observed in the fixed-regimen subgroup. For progression-free survival, combination therapy significantly improved it (HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.93, P < 0.001), corresponding to a restricted mean survival time difference of 1.582 months. In the fixed-regimen subgroup, CT + TCM significantly improved PFS (HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.94, P < 0.05), while in the personalized TCM subgroup the PFS benefit was not statistically significant (HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.67-1.07, P = 0.17). Conclusion: The addition of traditional Chinese medicine to chemotherapy is associated with improved overall and progression-free survival in advanced non-small cell lung cancer, although the overall survival benefit diminishes over time. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ Identifier CRD420261280359.
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.