4.6 Review

A systematic review of herbal medicines for the treatment of cancer cachexia in animal models

Journal

JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY-SCIENCE B
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages 9-22

Publisher

ZHEJIANG UNIV
DOI: 10.1631/jzus.B1800171

Keywords

Cancer; Cachexia; Herbal medicine; Traditional East Asian medicine systematic review

Funding

  1. Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine [K18041, K18043]
  2. National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea [NRF-2015R1D1A1A02062410, NRF-2017R1A2B 4005357]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to summarize preclinical studies on herbal medicines used to treat cancer cachexia and its underlying mechanisms.MethodsWe searched four representing databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, and the Web of Science up to December 2016. Randomized animal studies were included if the effects of any herbal medicine were tested on cancer cachexia. The methodological quality was evaluated by the Collaborative Approach to Meta-Analysis and Review of Animal Data from Experimental Studies (CAMARADE) checklist.ResultsA total of fourteen herbal medicines and their compounds were identified, including Coptidis Rhizoma, berberine, Bing De Ling, curcumin, Qing-Shu-Yi-Qi-Tang, Scutellaria baicalensis, Hochuekkito, Rikkunshito, hesperidin, atractylodin, Sipjeondaebo-tang, Sosiho-tang, Anemarrhena Rhizoma, and Phellodendri Cortex. All the herbal medicines, except curcumin, have been shown to ameliorate the symptoms of cancer cachexia through anti-inflammation, regulation of the neuroendocrine pathway, and modulation of the ubiquitin proteasome system or protein synthesis.ConclusionsThis study showed that herbal medicines might be a useful approach for treating cancer cachexia. However, more detailed experimental studies on the molecular mechanisms and active compounds are needed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available