SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2026
Comparative efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine injections combined with chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Although chemotherapy is an important treatment strategy for advanced NSCLC, its efficacy is limited by treatment resistance and adverse events. Traditional Chinese medicine injections (TCMIs) are widely used as adjunctive therapies; however, the comparative efficacy and safety of different TCMI-based regimens remain unclear. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of various TCMIs combined with chemotherapy using Bayesian network meta-analysis. Methods: RCTs on TCMIs combined with chemotherapy for NSCLC were retrieved from Chinese databases including CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, as well as English databases including PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. The retrieval period was from January 1, 2021 to May 1, 2026. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies, and the certainty of network evidence was evaluated using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework. Stata and R software were used to perform network meta-analysis. Results: A total of 71 RCTs involving 6,386 patients were included. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that Kanglaite Injection combined with chemotherapy showed a relatively favorable ranking for objective response rate (ORR), CD8, and skin adverse reactions; Kang'ai Injection combined with chemotherapy for hemoglobin reduction-related adverse reactions; Shenqi Fuzheng Injection for natural killer cells (NK cells), immunoglobulin G (IgG), neuron-specific enolase (NSE), and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9); Aidi Injection for immunoglobulin A (IgA), immunoglobulin M (IgM), and bone marrow suppression-related adverse reactions; Fufang Kushen Injection for carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and adverse reactions such as leukopenia, liver and kidney function damage, and gastrointestinal symptoms; Shenmai Injection combined with chemotherapy for carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125); Yadanzi Youru injection combined with chemotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC); Xiao'aiping Injection for cluster of differentiation 4 positive T lymphocyte (CD4 Conclusion: TCMIs combined with chemotherapy maybe associated with improvements in clinical response, immune-related indicators, tumor-associated markers, and treatment tolerability in patients with advanced NSCLC. However,given the limited certainty of evidence, substantial heterogeneity, and methodological limitations of included studies, these findings should be interpreted cautiously and require confirmation through high-quality prospectivestudies. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD420261392216.
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.