DataSheet4_The Effect of Chinese Medicine Compound in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis on the Level of Rheumatoid Factor and Anti-Cyclic Citrullinated Peptide Antibodies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.xlsx
Objectives: To evaluate the current evidence whether Chinese medicine compound (CMC) can reduce the serum levels of rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies (anti-CCP).
Methods: We comprehensively searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), the Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals (VIP), and Wanfang data. We then performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the CMC therapy methods. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42020216284.
Results: In total, 65 studies were eligible for inclusion, including 6099 patients. The result of the meta-analysis showed that compared with common Western medicine therapy, CMC monotherapy or combined with Western medicine was able to reduce serum RF (SMD= −0.85, 95%CI −1.04 to −0.67) and anti-CCP (SMD= −0.56, 95%CI −0.79 to −0.32) levels to some extent. In the efficacy meta-analysis, a greater number of CMC-treated patients achieved the efficacy criteria after a period of treatment, where the relative risk (RR) was 1.20 [1.08, 1.33] for achieving ACR20, 1.57 [1.38, 1.78] for ACR50, and 2.21 [1.72, 2.84] for ACR70. At the same time, there was a statistically significant difference in the effective rate of the patient's TCM symptoms (RR = 1.22, 95%CI 1.19–1.26).
Conclusions: Through this meta-analysis and systematic review, we found that CMC for the treatment of RA is effective in reducing RF and anti-CCP levels and might have better clinical efficacy than Western medicine monotherapy. Some active components are responsible for this efficacy and worth further exploring.
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.1002/art.27584
- https://doi.org//10.1002/art.1780310302
- https://doi.org//10.2307/2533446
- https://doi.org//10.1155/2014/492873
- https://doi.org//10.1002/art.11181
- https://doi.org//10.1038/aps.2010.34
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.fct.2007.07.016
- https://doi.org//10.1016/s1875-5364%2813%2960067-9
- https://doi.org//10.3736/jcim20100107
- https://doi.org//10.1097/00002281-200405000-00013
- https://doi.org//10.1002/art.1780380602
- https://doi.org//10.1136/ard.2003.014233
- https://doi.org//10.1172/jci60975
- https://doi.org//10.1002/ptr.6306
- https://doi.org//10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
- https://doi.org//10.3109/03009749509095183
- https://doi.org//10.3111/13696998.2013.856314
- https://doi.org//10.1093/rheumatology/kes279
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.ejphar.2008.01.032
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jep.2012.02.034
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s00296-012-2635-6
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s12016-012-8318-y
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nrdp.2018.2
- https://doi.org//10.1016/s0002-9343%2899%2900365-4
- https://doi.org//10.1136/ard.2004.033571
- https://doi.org//10.3899/jrheum.101070
- https://doi.org//10.1016/s0254-6272%2811%2960009-5
- https://doi.org//10.1002/art.38307
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.autrev.2015.01.013
- https://doi.org//10.1196/annals.1443.013
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.ejmech.2018.09.027
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jphs.2015.02.011
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.pharmthera.2019.107452
- https://doi.org//10.1071/fp18080
CC BY 4.0