Guideline-Based Chinese Herbal Medicine Treatment Plus Standard Care for Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (G-CHAMPS): Evidence From China

Effects of traditional Chinese medicine on treatment outcomes in severe COVID-19 patients: a single-centre study

As the search for effective treatments for COVID-19 continues, the high mortality rate among critically ill patients in Intensive Care Units (ICU) presents a profound challenge. This study explores the potential benefits of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) as a supplementary treatment for severe COVID-19. A total of 110 critically ill COVID-19 patients at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Vulcan Hill Hospital between Feb., 2020, and April, 2020 (Wuhan, China) participated in this observational study. All patients received standard supportive care protocols, with a subset of 81 also receiving TCM as an adjunct treatment. Clinical characteristics during the treatment period and the clinical outcome of each patient were closely monitored and analysed. Our findings indicated that the TCM group exhibited a significantly lower mortality rate compared with the non-TCM group (16 of 81 vs 24 of 29; 0.3 vs 2.3 person/month). In the adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, TCM treatment was associated with improved survival odds (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the analysis also revealed that TCM treatment could partially mitigate inflammatory responses, as evidenced by the reduced levels of proinflammatory cytokines, and contribute to the recovery of multiple organic functions, thereby potentially increasing the survival rate of critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Recent advances in anti-inflammatory active components and action mechanisms of natural medicines

Inflammation is a series of reactions caused by the body's resistance to external biological stimuli. Inflammation affects the occurrence and development of many diseases. Anti-inflammatory drugs have been used widely to treat inflammatory diseases, but long-term use can cause toxic side-effects and affect human functions. As immunomodulators with long-term conditioning effects and no drug residues, natural products are being investigated increasingly for the treatment of inflammatory diseases. In this review, we focus on the inflammatory process and cellular mechanisms in the development of diseases such as inflammatory bowel disease, atherosclerosis, and coronavirus disease-2019. Also, we focus on three signaling pathways (Nuclear factor-kappa B, p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase, Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription-3) to explain the anti-inflammatory effect of natural products. In addition, we also classified common natural products based on secondary metabolites and explained the association between current bidirectional prediction progress of natural product targets and inflammatory diseases.

Persistent clinical symptoms and their association with CM syndromes in post-COVID-19 rehabilitation patients in Hong Kong

Background

Heterogeneous clinical conditions were observed in individuals who had recovered from COVID-19 and some symptoms were found to persist for an extended period post-COVID. Given the non-specific nature of the symptoms, Chinese medicine (CM) is advantageous in providing holistic medical assessment for individuals experiencing persisting problems. Chinese medicine is a type of treatment that involves prescribing regimens based on CM Syndromes diagnosed by CM practitioners. However, inadequate research on CM elements behind the practice has faced scrutiny.

Methods

This study analysed 1058 CM medical records from 150 post-COVID-19 individuals via a semi-text-mining approach. A logistic model with MCMCglmm was then utilised to analyse the associations between the indicated factors and identified conditions. Calculations were performed using R Studio and related libraries.

Results

With the semi-text-mining approach, three common CM Syndromes (Qi and Yin Deficiency, Lung and Spleen Deficiency, Qi Deficiency of both Spleen and Lung) and nine clinical conditions (fatigue, poor sleep, dry mouth, shortness of breath, cough, headache, tiredness, sweating, coughing phlegm) were identified in the CM clinical records. Analysis via MCMCglmm revealed that the occurrence of persisting clinical conditions was significantly associated with female gender, existing chronic conditions (hypertension, high cholesterol, and diabetes mellitus), and the three persisting CM Syndromes. The current study triangulated the findings from our previous observational study, further showing that patients with certain post-COVID CM Syndromes had significantly increased log-odds of having persisting clinical conditions. Furthermore, this study elucidated that the presence of chronic conditions in the patients would also significantly increase the log-odds of having persistent post-COVID clinical conditions.

Conclusion

This study provided insights on mining text-based CM clinical records to identify persistent post-COVID clinical conditions and the factors associated with their occurrence. Future studies could examine the integration of integrating exercise modules, such as health qigong Liuzijue, into multidisciplinary rehabilitation programmes.

Combination of Chinese herbal medicine and conventional western medicine for coronavirus disease 2019: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) plus conventional western medicine (CWM) in comparison with CWM against COVID-19.

Methods

We searched eight electronic databases and three trial registers spanning from January 1, 2020 to May 18, 2023. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness and safety of CHM plus CWM and CWM against COVID-19 in our study. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0 (RoB2) was applied to evaluate the methodological quality of the included RCTs. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was employed to assess the certainty of evidence. Statistical analysis was implemented in R version 4.1.2.

Results

Our study included 50 RCTs involving 11,624 patients. In comparison with sole CWM, CHM plus CWM against COVID-19 significantly enhanced clinical effective rate (RR = 1.18, 95% CI [1.13, 1.22]), improved chest image (RR = 1.19, 95% CI [1.11, 1.28]), inhibited clinical deterioration (RR = 0.45, 95% CI [0.33, 0.60]), lowered mortality (RR = 0.53, 95% CI [0.40, 0.70]), and reduced the total score of TCM syndrome (SMD = -1.24, 95% CI [-1.82, -0.66]). SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid conversion time (MD = -2.66, 95% CI [-3.88, -1.44]), duration of hospitalization (MD = -2.36, 95% CI [-3.89, -0.82]), and clinical symptom (fever, cough, fatigue, and shortness of breath) recovery times were shorter in CHM plus CWM groups than in CWM groups. Further, CHM plus CWM treatment was more conducive for some laboratory indicators returning to normal levels. No statistical difference was found in the incidence of total adverse reactions between the two groups (RR = 0.97, 95% CI [0.88, 1.07]). We assessed the risk of bias for 246 outcomes, and categorized 55 into "low risk", 151 into "some concerns", and 40 into "high risk". Overall, the certainty of the evidence ranged from moderate to very low.

Conclusions

Potentially, CHM listed in this study, as an adjunctive therapy, combining with CWM is an effective and safe therapy mode for COVID-19. However, more high-quality RCTs are needed to draw more accurate conclusions.

Clinical trial registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=293963.

The efficacy and safety of combined chinese herbal medicine and western medicine therapy for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the clinical efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) with and without Western medicine (WM) for different severity of COVID-19.

METHODS

CNKI, PubMed, Wanfang Database, ClinicalTrails.gov, Embase, ChiCTR and ICTRP were searched from 01 Jan, 2020 to 30 Jun, 2021. Two authors independently assessed all the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for trial inclusion, data extraction and quality assessment. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager software (RevMan 5.4.1). Evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcomes included total effectiveness rate. Secondary outcomes included improvements in symptom improvement and total adverse event rate. Different severity of COVID-19 patients was assessed in subgroup analysis. This study was registered with INPLASY, INPLASY202210072.

RESULTS

22 high quality RCTs involving 1789 participants were included. There were no trial used CHM alone nor compare placebo or no treatment. Compared with WM, combined CHM and WM (CHM-WM) treatment showed higher total effectiveness rate, lower symptom scores of fever, cough, fatigue, dry throat and pharyngalgia, shorter mean time to viral conversion, better Computerized Tomography (CT) image and blood results, fewer total adverse events and worse conditions (P < 0.05). Subgroup analysis showed that the total effectiveness rate of combined CHM-WM group was significantly higher than WM group, especially for mild and moderate patients. No significant differences in mortality and adverse events were found between combined CHM-WM and WM treatment. No serious adverse events and long-term outcomes were reported.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence supported the therapeutic effects and safety of combined CHM-WM treatment on COVID-19, especially for patients with mild and moderate symptoms. Long-term effects of therapy are worthy in further study.

Herbal Medicine Intervention for the Treatment of COVID-19: A Living Systematic Review and Cumulative Meta-Analysis

Background: Integrative herbal medicine has been reported to have beneficial effects in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Aim: To compile up-to-date evidence of the benefits and risks of herbal medicine for the treatment of COVID-19 symptoms.

Methods: Eleven databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure Database (CNKI), Wanfang Database, and Chinese Science and Technique Journals Database (VIP), Research Information Service System (RISS), Korean Medical database (KMBase), Korean Association of Medical Journal database (KoreaMed), and OASIS database, were searched from 15 June, 2020, until 28 March 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), published in any language, reporting the efficacy and safety outcomes of herbal medicine in patients of all ages with a PCR-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 were included in this analysis. Data extraction and quality assessments were performed independently.

Results: Random-effects meta-analyses showed evidence of favorable effects of treatment with herbal medicine when added to standard treatment, versus standard treatment alone, on the total effective rate (p = 0.0001), time to remission from fever (p < 0.00001), rate of remission from coughing (p < 0.0001), fatigue (p = 0.02), sputum production (p = 0.004), improvement of manifestations observed on chest computed tomography scans (p < 0.00001), incidence of progression to severe COVID-19 (p = 0.003), all-cause mortality (p = 0.003), time to a negative COVID-19 coronavirus test (p < 0.0001), and duration of hospital stay (p = 0.0003). There was no evidence of a difference between herbal medicine added to standard treatment, versus standard treatment alone, on the rate of remission from symptoms such as a fever, sore throat, nasal congestion and discharge, diarrhea, dry throat, chills, and the rate of conversion to a negative COVID-19 coronavirus test. Meta-analysis showed no evidence of a significant difference in adverse events between the two groups. There was an unclear risk of bias across the RCTs included in this analysis, indicating that most studies had methodological limitations.

Conclusion: Current evidence suggests that herbal medicine added to standard treatment has potential benefits in the treatment of COVID-19 symptoms but the certainty of evidence was low.

Efficacy and Safety of Chinese Medicine for COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine for COVID-19 treatment with a focus on the benefits of symptomatic relief and time-related indexes. Seven electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chongqing VIP, Wanfang Data, and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry) were systematically searched from their beginning to April 2021. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing patients using Western therapy (WT) alone and those using additional Chinese medicine (WT [Formula: see text] CM) were included. Primary outcomes included overall efficacy, lung recovery, and time to viral assay conversion. Secondary outcomes included time and rate of individual symptom recovery, laboratory indicators, and adverse events. Overall, 15 RCTs, including 1469 participants, were included in this review. WT [Formula: see text] CM significantly improved overall efficacy (risk ratio, RR [Formula: see text] 1.21; 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.30; [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] 0.01) and lung recovery (RR [Formula: see text] 1.30; 95% CI:1.19 to 1.42; [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] 0.01) and shortened the time to viral assay conversion (weighted mean differences, WMD [Formula: see text]1.38; 95% CI: -1.98 to -0.78; [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] 0.01) and duration of chest distress (WMD [Formula: see text] 2.41; 95% CI: -2.99 to -1.83; [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] 0.01) compared to WT alone. There was no difference in safety between the WT [Formula: see text] CM and WT groups (RR [Formula: see text] 0.94; 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.39; [Formula: see text] 0.76). In conclusion, the synthesized evidence from 15 RCTs showed that additional Chinese medication may improve treatment efficacy, relieve symptoms, promote lung recovery, and reduce the inflammatory response against COVID-19, while not increasing the risk of adverse events compared with conventional Western medication alone.

Oral Chinese Herbal Medicine on Immune Responses During Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Cellular immune responses including lymphocyte functions and immune effector cells are critical for the control of coronavirus infection. Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) potentially has a therapeutic effect for treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Nevertheless, there are limited clinical practice suggestions on immunogenicity of the CHM against SARS-CoV-2. To assess the effect of oral CHM on immunogenicity and whether oral CHM improves the clinical parameters through the immunity profile during COVID-19, we performed the present study.

METHODS

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, 11 databases were searched for relevant studies assessing oral CHM for COVID-19 on November 20, 2020 (updated March 9, 2021). Primary outcomes mainly included immunity profiles. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality; the remission time of fever, cough, chest tightness, and fatigue. The random effect was used to estimate the heterogeneity of the studies. Summary relative risks, weight mean difference and standardized mean difference were measured with 95% confidence intervals. Modified Jadad scale and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies, respectively. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

We analyzed findings from 3,145 patients in 30 eligible studies. Compared with routine treatment, oral CHM, as an adjuvant medicine, improved lymphocyte counts, CD4+, and CD4+/CD8+ ratio with low quality of evidence; improved CD3+ with moderate quality of evidence; and reduced TNF-α with low certainty of evidence. Besides, oral CHM, as an adjuvant medicine reduced the time to clinical symptoms remission with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, compared with routine treatment alone.

CONCLUSION

CHM may be recommended as an adjuvant immunotherapy for disease modification and symptom relief in COVID-19 treatment. However, large RCTs objectively assessing the efficacy of CHM on immune responses in COVID-19 are needed to confirm our findings.

Role of herbal medicines in the management of patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background and aim

The management of the worldwide spreading COVID-19 consists of amelioration of its symptoms but no cure is yet available. Herbal medicines supplemented with the Western medicine have been applied for COVID-19 treatment in India, China, Iran, and other countries. This systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs evaluates the effect and safety of herbal intervention in the management of COVID-19.

Experimental procedure

RCTs from databases like PubMed, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, Science Direct, CTRI, AYUSH Research Portal, India, were reviewed and the data were extracted for study sample demographics, intervention details, clinical effect, inflammatory markers and safety monitoring. Outcomes were expressed as Risk-ratio (RR) with 95% CI for dichotomous data, and Mean-Difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous data.

Result and conclusion

From the 32 eligible studies, a total of 3177 COVID-19 patients were included in the review. Herbal intervention as an adjuvant to Western medicine causes significantly higher improvement compared to Western medicine alone [Fever (RR = 1.09 CI 1.03, 1.15), Cough (Risk-Ratio = 1.22 CI 1.08, 1.37), Fatigue (Risk-Ratio = 1.27 CI 1.11, 1.44), Chest CT Improvement (Risk-Ratio = 1.15 CI 1.08, 1.23)]. The laboratory parameters were also better in the herbal medicine group compared to standard care group only WBC (MD = 0.36 CI 0.16, 0.55), Lymphocyte percentage (MD = 5.48 CI 3.05, 7.92), Absolute lymphocyte count (MD = 0.23 CI 0.07, 0.39), CRP (MD = −5.66 CI -7.96, −3.37). However, duration of hospital stays (MD = −1.82 CI -3.84, 0.21); IL-6 (MD = −3.67 CI -8.76, 1.43), ESR Level (MD = −10.38 CI -25.96, 5.21) were statistically insignificant. No significant adverse events for herbal medications were noted in the included RCTs, during the time of the studies. (n = 665, RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.76, 1.14).

•

Herbal intervention along with Western medicine has better recovery for fever, cough, fatigue, chest CT Improvement, RT-PCR Negativity, sore-throat, and duration of hospital stay.

•

The laboratory parameters (e.g., WBC, Lymphocyte percentage, Absolute Lymphocyte count, CRP, IL-6, ESR levels) were also better in the herbal medicine group compared to standard care group only.

•

No significant adverse events for herbal medications were noted in the included RCTs.

State-of-the-art evidence of traditional Chinese medicine for treating coronavirus disease 2019

Traditional Chinese medicine has widely been used internationally in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) since January 2020. There has been great interest in initiating clinical studies testing different Chinese medicine therapies for COVID-19, but the majority of registered studies have yet to move forward due to a lack of COVID-19 patients in mainland China. The aim of this article was to systematically review the current clinical research evidence on Chinese medicine for treating COVID-19 from international and domestic bibliographic databases to reflect on the advances in this field.

The Role of Herbal and Nutritional Treatments in the Fight against COVID-19 and Other Respiratory Tract Infections

With the growing spread of COVID-19 worldwide, the appeal to alternative and nutritional therapies in conjunction with medical therapies has been heightened. This article aims to review studies assessing the roles of Chinese traditional medicine and nutrition in upper respiratory infections, including COVID-19. Various Chinese herbal protocols have been shown to fight respiratory infections, with several having been tested on the novel coronavirus. Additionally, promising findings have been reported when medical treatments were complemented with nutritional interventions. Supplementation with vitamins C and D, Zinc and Selenium are discussed, in addition to certain phytochemicals and food that also possess immunoregulatory and antiviral properties. Further clinical studies are needed to establish these alternative treatments as part of the management of emerging respiratory infections.

Traditional Chinese medicine in COVID-19

COVID-19 pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread across the globe, posing an enormous threat to public health and safety. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), in combination with Western medicine (WM), has made important and lasting contributions in the battle against COVID-19. In this review, updated clinical effects and potential mechanisms of TCM, presented in newly recognized three distinct phases of the disease, are summarized and discussed. By integrating the available clinical and preclinical evidence, the efficacies and underlying mechanisms of TCM on COVID-19, including the highly recommended three Chinese patent medicines and three Chinese medicine formulas, are described in a panorama. We hope that this comprehensive review not only provides a reference for health care professionals and the public to recognize the significant contributions of TCM for COVID-19, but also serves as an evidence-based in-depth summary and analysis to facilitate understanding the true scientific value of TCM.

Efficacy and Safety of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Until now, there is no clinically approved specific medicine to treat COVID-19. Prior systematic reviews (SRs) have shown that traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) reduces the number of patients with severe disease and time to fever clearance, promotes clinical effectiveness, and improves chest images and the negativity rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acid test. Few SRs arrived at a definitive conclusion, and more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were published. We conducted this study to summarize the latest evidence of TCM in COVID-19. Methods: Eight online databases were searched from December 2019 to July 2020, updated to March 2021. Only RCTs evaluating the clinical efficacy and safety of TCM in the treatment of COVID-19 were included. Primary outcomes were clinical cure and the negativity of the SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test. Secondary outcomes included clinical deterioration, ARDS, mechanical ventilation, death, time to fever clearance, duration of hospitalization, and chest imaging improvement. Safety outcomes included adverse events and serious adverse events during treatment. Two reviewers selected the included articles, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data independently and in duplicate. Results: A total of 25 RCTs involving 2222 participants were selected in the systematic review, and seven RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that TCM plus routine treatment was significantly better than routine treatment alone in clinical cure (risk ratio [RR] = 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.04, 1.38], P = 0.01) and chest image improvement (RR = 1.22, 95% CI [1.07, 1.39], P = 0.01) and could reduce clinical deterioration (RR = 0.39, 95% CI [0.18, 0.86], P = 0.02), ARDS (RR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.11, 0.69], P = 0.01), mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.30, 95% CI [0.12, 0.77], P = 0.01), or death rate (RR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.09, 0.84], P = 0.02). No significant difference between TCM and routine treatment in the negativity of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test (RR = 1.08, 95% CI [0.94, 1.23], P = 0.29) was observed. Finally, there was no overall significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. The summary of evidence showed moderate confidence of a benefit of 11.8% in clinical cure and 14.0% in chest image improvement and a reduction of 5.9% in clinical deterioration, 25.4% in ARDS, 18.3% in mechanical ventilation, and 4.5% in death with TCM plus routine treatment compared to routine treatment alone in patients with COVID-19. A low confidence of a benefit of 5.4% in the negativity of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test was also observed. Conclusions: Synethized evidence of 21 outcomes in 8 RCTs showed moderate certainty that TCM treatment plus routine treatment may promote a clinical cure and chest image improvement compared to routine treatment alone while reducing clinical deterioration, development of ARDS, use of mechanical ventilation, and death in patients with COVID-19. TCM treatment plus routine treatment may not promote the negativity of the SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test compared to routine treatment alone. TCM treatment was found to be safe for patients with COVID-19.

Abstracts for reports of randomised trials of COVID-19 interventions had low quality and high spin

OBJECTIVES

To assess the reporting quality of abstracts for published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including the use of spin strategies and the level of spin for RCTs with statistically non-significant primary outcomes, and to explore potential predictors for reporting quality and the severity of spin.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

PubMed was searched to find RCTs that tested interventions for COVID-19, and the reporting quality and spin in the abstracts were assessed. Linear regression analyses were used to identify potential predictors.

RESULTS

Forty RCT abstracts were included in our assessment of reporting quality, and a higher word count in the abstract was significantly correlated with higher reporting scores (95% CI 0.044 to 0.658, P=0.026). Multiple spin strategies were identified. Our multivariate analyses showed that geographical origin was associated with severity of spin, with research from non-Asian regions containing fewer spin strategies (95% CI -0.760 to -0.099, P=0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

The reporting quality of abstracts of RCTs of interventions for COVID-19 is far from satisfactory. A relatively high proportion of the abstracts contained spin, and the findings reported in the results and conclusion sections of these abstracts need to be interpreted with caution.

The effect of Chinese herbal medicine on digestive system and liver functions should not be neglected in COVID-19: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Gastrointestinal symptoms and liver injury are common in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, profiles of different pharmaceutical interventions used are relatively underexplored. Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) has been increasingly used for patients with COVID-19, but the efficacy of CHM used in COVID-19 on gastrointestinal symptoms and liver functions has not been well studied with definitive results based on the updated studies. The present study aimed at testing the efficacy of CHM on digestive symptoms and liver function (primary outcomes), the aggravation of COVID-19, and the time to viral assay conversion (secondary outcomes), among patients with COVID-19, compared with standard pharmacotherapy. The literature search was undertaken in 11 electronic databases from December 1, 2019 up to November 8, 2020. Appraisal of the evidence was conducted with Cochrane risk of bias tool or Newcastle Ottawa Scale. A random-effects model or subgroup analysis was conducted when significant heterogeneity was identified in the meta-analysis. The certainty of the evidence was assessed with the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation approach. Forty-eight included trials involving 4,704 participants were included. Meta-analyses favored CHM plus standard pharmacotherapy for COVID-19 on reducing the aggravation of COVID-19 and the time to viral assay conversion compared with standard pharmacotherapy. However, the present CHM as a complementary therapy for treating COVID-19 may not be beneficial for improving most gastrointestinal symptoms and liver function based on the current evidence. More well-conducted trials are warranted to confirm the potential efficacy of CHM furtherly.

Potential bangle (Zingiber montanum J.König) rhizome extract as a supplement to prevent and reduce symptoms of Covid-19

The morbidity and mortality rates due to Covid-19 are increasing day by day, to overcome this, we urgently need a better treatment strategy, therefore various ways and strategies for this must be pursued. The purpose of the present review is to explain that the rhizome of bangle (Zingiber montanum) has great potential to increase antibodies and reduce symptoms of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which also seems suitable for treating Covid-19. Method: This review is looking for the results of scientific research from various sources, regarding the efficacy of bangle (Zingiber montanum) rhizome which is strongly suspected to be able to prevent, and reduce the symptoms that occur in COVID-19. The results showed that the bangle rhizome extract had activity as immunomodulatory, antiviral and reduced symptoms such as what happened in COVID-19. Conclusion: Bangle rhizome extract has dozens of nutritious substances and has multifunctional activities, and it can be postulated that among the benefits of bangle rhizome extract it is able to prevent and reduce symptoms that occur in Covid-19, and preclinical studies and clinical studies are needed to prove this postulate.

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.

Taking Proactive Action: Introduction to the Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 with Traditional Chinese Medicine

Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has fully displayed its strength and specialty and has played an important role in the prevention and treatment of the pandemic. Faced with the unexpected development of the pandemic, the Chinese government has responded quickly and attached great importance to the effect of TCM. Comprehensive therapy integrating Chinese and Western medicine has achieved remarkable success. To summarize and introduce the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 with TCM, this article covers the perspectives of policy guideline issue, clinical diagnosis participation, and scientific research progress.

Reporting and design of randomized controlled trials for COVID-19: A systematic review

Background

The novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has mobilized global research at an unprecedented scale. While challenges associated with the COVID-19 trial landscape have been discussed previously, no comprehensive reviews have been conducted to assess the reporting, design, and data sharing practices of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Purpose

The purpose of this review was to gain insight into the current landscape of reporting, methodological design, and data sharing practices for COVID-19 RCTs.

Data sources

We conducted three searches to identify registered clinical trials, peer-reviewed publications, and pre-print publications.

Study selection

After screening eight major trial registries and 7844 records, we identified 178 registered trials and 38 publications describing 35 trials, including 25 peer-reviewed publications and 13 pre-prints.

Data extraction

Trial ID, registry, location, population, intervention, control, study design, recruitment target, actual recruitment, outcomes, data sharing statement, and time of data sharing were extracted.

Data synthesis

Of 178 registered trials, 112 (62.92%) were in hospital settings, median planned recruitment was 100 participants (IQR: 60, 168), and the majority (n = 166, 93.26%) did not report results in their respective registries. Of 35 published trials, 31 (88.57%) were in hospital settings, median actual recruitment was 86 participants (IQR: 55.5, 218), 10 (28.57%) did not reach recruitment targets, and 27 trials (77.14%) reported plans to share data.

Conclusions

The findings of our study highlight limitations in the design and reporting practices of COVID-19 RCTs and provide guidance towards more efficient reporting of trial results, greater diversity in patient settings, and more robust data sharing.

COVID-19 randomized controlled trials in medRxiv and PubMed

• This study investigated the difference between COVID-19 RCT in medRxiv and in PubMed. • SPIN in the conclusion was more frequently seen in reports in medRxiv than PubMed. • Readers should pay attention to the overstatements in preprints of COVID-19 RCT.

Effects of Tanreqing Capsule on the negative conversion time of nucleic acid in patients with COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study

Objective

Traditional Chinese medicine plays a significant role in the treatment of the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Tanreqing Capsule (TRQC) was used in the treatment of COVID-19 patients in the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center. This study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy of TRQC in the treatment of COVID-19.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 82 patients who had laboratory-confirmed mild and moderate COVID-19; patients were treated with TRQC in one designated hospital. The treatment and control groups consisted of 25 and 57 cases, respectively. The treatment group was given TRQC orally three times a day, three pills each time, in addition to conventional Western medicine treatments which were also administered to the control group. The clinical efficacy indicators, such as the negative conversion time of pharyngeal swab nucleic acid, the negative conversion time of fecal nucleic acid, the duration of negative conversion of pharyngeal-fecal nucleic acid, and the improvement in the level of immune indicators such as T-cell subsets (CD3, CD4 and CD45) were monitored.

Results

COVID-19 patients in the treatment group, compared to the control group, had a shorter negative conversion time of fecal nucleic acid (4 vs. 9 days, P = 0.047) and a shorter interval of negative conversion of pharyngeal-fecal nucleic acid (0 vs. 2 days, P = 0.042). The level of CD3⁺ T cells increased in the treatment group compared to the control group ([317.09 ± 274.39] vs. [175.02 ± 239.95] counts/μL, P = 0.030). No statistically significant differences were detected in the median improvement in levels of CD4⁺ T cells (173 vs. 107 counts/μL, P = 0.208) and CD45⁺ T cells (366 vs. 141 counts/μL, P = 0.117) between the treatment and control groups.

Conclusion

Significant reductions in the negative conversion time of fecal nucleic acid and the duration of negative conversion of pharyngeal-fecal nucleic acid were identified in the treatment group as compared to the control group, illustrating the potential therapeutic benefits of using TRQC as a complement to conventional medicine in patients with mild and moderate COVID-19. The underlying mechanism may be related to the improved levels of the immune indicator CD3⁺ T cells.

Chinese herbal medicine for COVID-19: Current evidence with systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is currently no drug or therapy that cures COVID-19, a highly contagious and life-threatening disease.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis summarized contemporary studies that report the use of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) to treat COVID-19.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Six electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, Wanfang Data and China National Knowledge Infrastructure) were searched from their beginning to May 15, 2020 with the following search terms: traditional Chinese medicine, Chinese medicine, Chinese herbal medicine, COVID-19, new coronavirus pneumonia, SARS-CoV-2, and randomized controlled trial.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from peer-reviewed journals and non-reviewed publications were included. Further, included RCTs had a control group that was given standard care (SC; such as conventional Western medicine treatments or routine medical care), and a treatment group that was given SC plus CHM.

DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS

Two evaluators screened and collected literature independently; information on participants, study design, interventions, follow-up and adverse events were extracted, and risk of bias was assessed. The primary outcomes included scores that represented changes in symptoms and signs over the course of treatment. Secondary outcomes included the level of inflammatory markers, improvement of pneumonia confirmed by computed tomography (CT), and adverse events. Dichotomous data were expressed as risk ratio or hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI); where time-to-event analysis was used, outcomes were expressed as odds ratio with 95% CI. Continuous data were expressed as difference in means (MD) with 95% CI, and standardized mean difference (SMD) was used when different outcome scales were pooled.

RESULTS

Seven original studies, comprising a total of 732 adults, were included in this meta-analysis. Compared to SC alone, CHM plus SC had a superior effect on the change of symptom and sign score (-1.30 by SMD, 95% CI [-2.43, -0.16]; 3 studies; n = 261, P = 0.03), on inflammatory marker C-reactive protein (CRP, mg/L; -11.82 by MD, 95% CI [-17.95, -5.69]; 5 studies; n = 325, P = 0.0002), on number of patients with improved lung CT scans (1.34 by risk ratio, 95% CI [1.19, 1.51]; 4 studies; n = 489, P < 0.00001). No significant adverse events were recorded in the included RCTs.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence shows that CHM, as an adjunct treatment with standard care, helps to improve treatment outcomes in COVID-19 cases.

The Significance of Natural Product Derivatives and Traditional Medicine for COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). To date, there have been more than 10 million reported cases, more than 517,000 deaths in 215 countries, areas or territories. There is no effective antiviral medicine to prevent or treat COVID-19. Natural products and traditional medicine products with known safety profiles are a promising source for the discovery of new drug leads. There is increasing number of publications reporting the effect of natural products and traditional medicine products on COVID-19. In our review, we provide an overview of natural products and their derivatives or mimics, as well as traditional medicine products, which were reported to exhibit potential to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 infection in vitro, and to manage COVID-19 in vivo, or in clinical reports or trials. These natural products and traditional medicine products are categorized in several classes: (1) anti-malaria drugs including chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, (2) antivirals including nucleoside analogs (remdesivir, favipiravir, β-D-N4-hydroxycytidine, ribavirin and among others), lopinavir/ritonavir and arbidol, (3) antibiotics including azithromycin, ivermectin and teicoplanin, (4) anti-protozoal drug, emetine, anti-cancer drug, homoharringtonine, and others, as well as (5) traditional medicine (Lian Hua Qing Wen Capsule, Shuang Huang Lian Oral Liquid, Qingfei Paidu Decoction and Scutellariae Radix). Randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled large clinical trials are needed to provide solid evidence for the potential effective treatment. Currently, drug repurposing is a promising strategy to quickly find an effective treatment for COVID-19. In addition, carefully combined cocktails need to be examined for preventing a COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting global health concerns.

Chinese medical drugs for coronavirus disease 2019: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Integration of Chinese medical drugs (CMD) and western medicine (WM) has been widely used in the treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CMD for COVID-19.

Method

A literature search was performed in six databases from injection to June 2020. Both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs were considered as eligible. The quality of included RCTs were assessed by Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, and Review Manager 5.3 software was used to do meta-analysis.

Result

Eleven studies with 1259 patients were included in this study. CMD included herbal decoction and Chinese patent medicine. The methodological quality was evaluated as generally unclear. The results of meta-analysis showed that the integration of CMD and WM had better efficacy than WM in number of patients turned to severe and critical type (RR = 0.47, 95% CI=[0.32, 0.69], P < 0.0001), length of hospital stay (MD= -7.95, 95% CI=[-14.66, -1.24], P = 0.02), defervescence time (MD= -1.20, 95% CI=[-2.03, -0.38], P = 0.004), cough resolution rate (RR = 1.37, 95% CI=[1.15, 1.64], P = 0.0004), fatigue resolution rate (RR = 1.37, 95% CI=[1.02, 1.83], P = 0.04), and tachypnea resolution rate (RR = 2.20, 95% CI=[1.11, 4.39], P = 0.02). As for safety, there was no significant difference between two groups.

Conclusion

CMD may bring potential benefit to patients suffered from COVID-19. However, the quality of included trials is not good enough. High quality study with core outcome set are still required.