4.5 Article

Treatment of asthma patients with herbal medicine TJ-96: a randomized controlled trial

Journal

RESPIRATORY MEDICINE
Volume 96, Issue 6, Pages 469-474

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1053/rmed.2002.1307

Keywords

bronchial asthma; eosinophilic cationic protein; TJ-96 (Saiboku-to or Chai-pu-tang); bronchial eosinophilic inflammation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Alternative medicine use has increased at a remarkable pace all over the world in recent years. Although herbal medicine for the treatment of asthma is becoming the focus of public attention, randomized studies had not been performed, even in Eastern countries including Japan. This study was designed to investigate whether one of the Japanese government approved herbal complexes Soiboku-to (TJ-96) is effective for the treatment of atopic asthma, and to investigate whether this protective activity is associated with a reduction in eosinophilic inflammation. A double-blind, randomized, crossover design was used. Subjects received 2.5 g of TJ-96 or placebo orally 3 times daily for 4 weeks and then, after a washout period of at least 4 weeks, crossed over to receive the alternative treatment. We assessed the effects of pretreatment with TJ-96 on bronchoconstriction precipitated by inhalation of methacholine. Furthermore, eosinophil counts and measurement of eosinophilic cationic protein (ECP) were performed. After 4 weeks of treatment with TJ-96, values Of PC20-methacholine significantly improved in the treatment with TJ-96. Also, patients' symptoms, blood eosinophils, serum ECP, sputum eosinophils, and sputum ECP were significantly decreased, Our results suggest that TJ-96 has an anti inflammatory effect on bronchial eosinophilic infiltration. This study raises further interesting therapeutic possibilities and argues for further trials of new approaches to the treatment of asthma. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available