SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2026
Immunomodulatory potential of Mongolian medicine in sepsis: current evidence, challenges, and translational perspectives.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sepsis is a heterogeneous, time-dependent syndrome in which inflammatory injury, immune suppression, endothelial dysfunction, metabolic disturbance, and barrier failure may coexist. This narrative review evaluates whether current pharmacological evidence provides a defensible basis for investigating Traditional Mongolian Medicine as an adjunctive source of immunomodulatory candidates in sepsis. A concise account of sepsis immunopathology is used as an interpretive framework, after which evidence from named Mongolian formulas, extracts, medicinal materials, and isolated constituents is mapped according to ethnomedical specificity, model directness, and study-design limitations. Direct sepsis-specific evidence is scarce. Daruqi particles, HHQG, Hohgardi-9, Nagab-9, Monflu, Batri-7, Qiqirigan-8, and selected extracts have mainly been studied in lipopolysaccharide-induced acute lung injury, organ-injury, enteritis, inflammatory, or metabolic models. These studies suggest effects on NF-κB/MAPK signaling, myeloid-cell infiltration, neutrophil extracellular traps, redox regulation, and lipid metabolism, but generally do not assess polymicrobial infection, pathogen clearance, survival, late immunosuppression, or human immune endotypes. Widely distributed compounds such as quercetin, berberine, geniposide, and gallate are therefore treated only as non-specific constituent-level evidence of pharmacological plausibility. We propose candidate-specific priorities for chemical standardization, rigorous sepsis modeling, pharmacokinetic and safety evaluation, and biomarker-guided translation. The current literature supports an ethnopharmacology-informed research agenda, not therapeutic efficacy in sepsis.
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.