4.5 Review

Oral Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) as an adjuvant treatment during chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review

期刊

LUNG CANCER
卷 68, 期 2, 页码 137-145

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2009.11.008

关键词

Chinese herbal medicine; Systematic review; Complementary medicine; Non-small cell lung cancer

资金

  1. Rufford Maurice Laing foundation
  2. Wellcome student scholarship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a major global health problem because of its prevalence and poor prognosis. Treatment options are limited and there is a need to explore alternatives. This systematic review evaluates the role of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) in association with chemotherapy for NSCLC. Methods: English and Chinese databases were searched for RCTs comparing CHM with conventional biomedical treatment or placebo. Papers were reviewed systematically and data were analysed using standard Cochrane software Revman 5. Results: Fifteen Chinese trials involving 862 participants met the inclusion criteria. All trials were of poor quality with a considerable risk of bias. There was a significant improvement in quality of life (QoL) (increased Karnofsky Performance Status) (RR 1.83, 95% Cl 1.41-2.38, p < 0.00001 for both stages III, IV only NSCLC and all stages NSCLC) and less anaemia (RR 0.37, 95% Cl 0.15-0.91, p = 0.03 for stages III IV only NSCLC; p = 0.005 for all stages NSCLC) and neutropenia (RR 0.42, 95% Cl 0.22-0.82, p = 0.01 for stages III, IV only NSCLC; p < 0.00001 for all stages NSCLC) when CHM is combined with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone. There was no significant difference in short term effectiveness and limited inconclusive data concerning long term survival. Five promising herbs have been identified. Conclusion: It is possible that oral CHM used in conjunction with chemotherapy may improve QoL in NSCLC. This needs to be examined further with more rigorous methodology. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据