0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Efficacy and safety of total glucosides of paeony in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

      systematic-review

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Total glucosides of paeony (TGP), extracted from the Chinese medicine Paeonia lactiflora Pall., have been proven to be effective in various autoimmune diseases. We aim to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of TGP combined with different conventional therapeutic agents in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

          Methods: Eight databases were searched for randomized controlled studies of TGP for SLE. The search time was set from the establishment of the databases to March 2022. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane Evaluation Manual (5.1.0), RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis, and the certainty of the evidence was assessed by the GRADE methodology.

          Results: A total of 23 articles were included, including 792 patients overall in the treatment group and 781 patients overall in the control group. The meta-analysis results showed that TGP combined with conventional treatments was superior to the conventional treatments in reducing the SLE disease activity and the incidence of adverse reactions (SMD TGP+GC+CTX = −1.98, 95% Cl = [−2.50, −1.46], p < 0.001; SMD TGP+GC+HCQ = −0.65, 95% Cl = [−1.04, −0.26], p <0.001; SMD TGP+GC+TAC = −0.94, 95% Cl = [−1.53, -0.34], p < 0.05; SMD TGP+GC = −1.00, 95% Cl = [−1.64, −0.36], p < 0.05; and RR TGP+GC+CTX = 0.37, 95% Cl = [0.21, 0.64], p < 0.001). The results also showed that TGP helped improve other outcomes related to SLE disease activity, such as complement proteins (C3 and C4), immunoglobulins (IgA, IgM and, IgG), ESR, CRP, 24 h urine protein, and recurrence rate. In addition, TGP may also be effective in reducing the average daily dosage of glucocorticoids (GCs) and the cumulative dosage of cyclophosphamide (CTX). The certainty of the evidence was assessed as moderate to low.

          Conclusion: TGP is more effective and safer when used in combination with different conventional therapeutic agents. It helped reduce the disease activity of SLE and the incidence of adverse reactions. However, we should be cautious about these conclusions as the quality of the evidence is poor. Future studies should focus on improving the methodology. High-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be necessary to provide strong evidence for the efficacy of TGP for SLE.

          Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier CRD42021272481

          Related collections

          Most cited references63

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence.

              This article introduces the approach of GRADE to rating quality of evidence. GRADE specifies four categories-high, moderate, low, and very low-that are applied to a body of evidence, not to individual studies. In the context of a systematic review, quality reflects our confidence that the estimates of the effect are correct. In the context of recommendations, quality reflects our confidence that the effect estimates are adequate to support a particular recommendation. Randomized trials begin as high-quality evidence, observational studies as low quality. "Quality" as used in GRADE means more than risk of bias and so may also be compromised by imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness of study results, and publication bias. In addition, several factors can increase our confidence in an estimate of effect. GRADE provides a systematic approach for considering and reporting each of these factors. GRADE separates the process of assessing quality of evidence from the process of making recommendations. Judgments about the strength of a recommendation depend on more than just the quality of evidence. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Pharmacol
                Front Pharmacol
                Front. Pharmacol.
                Frontiers in Pharmacology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1663-9812
                07 December 2022
                2022
                : 13
                : 932874
                Affiliations
                [1] 1 Henan University of Chinese Medicine , Zhengzhou, China
                [2] 2 The First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Chinese Medicine , Zhengzhou, China
                [3] 3 Henan Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine , The Second Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Chinese Medicine , Zhengzhou, China
                Author notes

                Edited by: Shazia Qasim Jamshed, Sultan Zainal Abidin University, Malaysia

                Reviewed by: Sadia Shakeel, DOW University of Health Sciences (DUHS), Pakistan

                Yongsheng Chen, Jinan University, China

                Márió Gajdács, University of Szeged, Hungary

                Imma Pagano, University of Salerno, Italy

                *Correspondence: Songwei Li, lswhnszyy@ 123456hactcm.edu.cn
                [ † ]

                These authors have contributed equally to this work

                This article was submitted to Ethnopharmacology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Pharmacology

                Article
                932874
                10.3389/fphar.2022.932874
                9768345
                36569311
                38e28340-911c-4f32-a6ff-cc81c9b817ac
                Copyright © 2022 Gong, Li, Guo, Wu, Lu, Chen and Li.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 30 April 2022
                : 22 November 2022
                Categories
                Pharmacology
                Systematic Review

                Pharmacology & Pharmaceutical medicine
                total glucosides of paeony,meta-analysis,safety,efficacy,systemic lupus erythematosus (sle)

                Comments

                Comment on this article