Chinese herbal medicine for myasthenia gravis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Myasthenia Gravis (MG) is a disorder of neuromuscular transmission bringing mild ocular weakness to severe generalized muscle weakness and disability. The conventional treatments have long-term side effects, and Chinese herbal medicines (CHM) have shown possible effect and safety for MG patients, but the existing evidence was not robust enough and the results were out of date. METHODS: Searching for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted in 7 databases and clinical trial registries until July 2021. The ROB 2 tool was used to assess the study quality and GRADE was used to assess the quality of whole evidence. Meta-analyses were conducted and the results were presented as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Nineteen RCTs (1283 participants) testing 13 kinds of CHM with adequate randomization were included and six RCTs investigating Compound Huangqi were included in the meta-analyses. In addition to conventional treatment, nine CHMs reduced symptom scores of MG. Compound Huangqi plus conventional treatment (pyridostigmine bromide or prednisone or both) reduced the symptom scores compared with conventional treatment (MD = -3.56, 95%CI -4.86 to -2.26). Less adverse events happened in the CHM groups (3/247 in the CHM groups, 52/245 in the control groups, RR = 0.13, 95%CI 0.06 to 0.30, 9 RCTs, a total of 492 participants). The effect on quality of life was inconsistent. CONCLUSION: Nine CHMs could probably bring benefit for MG symptom improvement. Moderate to low certainty of evidence supported Compound Huangqi added-on conventional treatment probably bring extra benefit of improving MG symptoms. Adding CHMs could be safer than giving only conventional treatment. STUDY REGISTRATION: The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID: 32718).

Therapeutic effects and safety of oral Chinese patent medicine for COVID-19: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Chinese patent medicine (CPM) is an indispensable part of traditional Chinese medicine. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) manifests is an acute respiratory infectious disease. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the therapeutic effects and safety of oral CPM for COVID-19. METHODS: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that tested oral CPM for the treatment of COVID-19 identified from publications in CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, Web of Science, SinoMed, PubMed, Embase, BioRxiv, MedRxiv and arXiv before November 2nd, 2020. The risk of bias for each trial was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. RevMan 5.4 software was used for data analyses. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the online GRADEpro tool. RESULTS: Seven RCTs including 1079 participants were identified. The overall bias was assessed as "-high risk of bias" for all included trials. Oral CPM investigated were: Lianhua Qingwen capsule/granules (LHQW), Jinhua Qinggan granules (JHQG), Huoxiang Zhengqi dripping pills (HXZQ), Toujie Quwen granules (TJQW) and Lianhua Qingke granules (LHQK). Compared with conventional western therapy alone for people with COVID-19: regarding the main outcomes, the results showed that oral CPM combined with conventional western therapy improved cure rate (RR = 1.20, 95 % CI 1.04-1.38, involving LHQW and TJQW), reduced aggravation rate (RR = 0.50, 95 % CI 0.29 - 0.85, involving LHQW, JHQG, LHQK and TJQW); with regard to additional outcomes, the results showed that add-on oral CPM shortened the duration of fever, cough and fatigue, improved the recovery rate of cough and fatigue, and increased the improvement and recovery rate of chest CT manifestations. There were some differences in therapeutic effects among various CPMs for the same COVID-19 outcome. The use of TJQW and LHQG appeared not to increase the risk of adverse events, but JHQG may cause mild diarrhea. CONCLUSION: Low-certainty or very low-certainty evidence demonstrated that oral CPM may have add-on potential therapeutic effects for patients with non-serious COVID-19. These findings need to be further confirmed by well-designed clinical trials with adequate sample sizes.

Chinese Herbal Medicine Used With or Without Conventional Western Therapy for COVID-19: An Evidence Review of Clinical Studies.

Objective: To present the evidence of the therapeutic effects and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) used with or without conventional western therapy for COVID-19. Methods: Clinical studies on the therapeutic effects and safety of CHM for COVID-19 were included. We summarized the general characteristics of included studies, evaluated methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, analyzed the use of CHM, used Revman 5.4 software to present the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) to estimate the therapeutic effects and safety of CHM. Results: A total of 58 clinical studies were identified including RCTs (17.24%, 10), non-randomized controlled trials (1.72%, 1), retrospective studies with a control group (18.97%, 11), case-series (20.69%, 12) and case-reports (41.38%, 24). No RCTs of high methodological quality were identified. The most frequently tested oral Chinese patent medicine, Chinese herbal medicine injection or prescribed herbal decoction were: Lianhua Qingwen granule/capsule, Xuebijing injection and Maxing Shigan Tang. In terms of aggravation rate, pooled analyses showed that there were statistical differences between the intervention group and the comparator group (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.82, six RCTs; RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.64, five retrospective studies with a control group), that is, CHM plus conventional western therapy appeared better than conventional western therapy alone in reducing aggravation rate. In addition, compared with conventional western therapy, CHM plus conventional western therapy had potential advantages in increasing the recovery rate and shortening the duration of fever, cough and fatigue, improving the negative conversion rate of nucleic acid test, and increasing the improvement rate of chest CT manifestations and shortening the time from receiving the treatment to the beginning of chest CT manifestations improvement. For adverse events, pooled data showed that there were no statistical differences between the CHM and the control groups. Conclusion: Current low certainty evidence suggests that there maybe a tendency that CHM plus conventional western therapy is superior to conventional western therapy alone. The use of CHM did not increase the risk of adverse events.