Search

Background: The CONSORT Extension for Chinese Herbal Medicine Formula 2017 (CONSORT-CHM Formula 2017) has established a reporting standard for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of Chinese Herbal Medicine Formula (CHMF) interventions; however, its adherence and implications for the design and execution of study design remain ambiguous. It is necessary to evaluate the level of compliance with the CONSORT-CHM Formula 2017 in RCTs conducted over the past 5 years, and to determine the reporting quality of clinical trials in this field. Methods: First, a systematic search is conducted for RCTs on CHMF in EBM Reviews, Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED), Embase, Ovid-MEDLINE(R), Wanfang data, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP Chinese Medical Journal Database (VIP) and Chinese Biomedical Literature (CBM) database, that encompassed CHMF interventional RCTs published from 1 January 2018 to 8 June 2022, with language restriction to English or Chinese. Second, a descriptive analysis will be performed regarding the study design and general characteristics of the included trials. Third, for the quality assessment, we have subdivided the CONSORT-CHM Formula 2017 checklist (consisting of 22 extended items) into a total of 42 sub-questions to facilitate scoring, with a specific focus on the description, quality control, and safety assessment of CHMF interventions. Professional training and a pilot test on 100 randomly selected articles will be provided for all reviewers. Throughout this process, a standard operating procedure (SOP) for quality assessment will be developed to ensure consistency. Each item will be assessed by two reviewers in a paired back-to-back manner, and the compliance rate will be calculated to assess interrater agreement. Discussion: This review will identify the current reporting characteristics and quality of CHMF interventional studies and further evaluate the impact of CONSORT-CHM Formula 2017. The results may provide suggestions for future application or promotion of the guideline. Registration: The study has been registered on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/xpn7f). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aimed to assess the overall reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) formulas for patients with diabetes, and to identify factors associated with better reporting quality. Methods: Four databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were systematically searched from their inception to December 2022. The reporting quality was assessed based on the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement and its CHM formula extension. The overall CONSORT and its CHM formula extension scores were calculated and expressed as proportions separately. We also analyzed the pre-specified study characteristics and performed exploratory regressions to determine their associations with the reporting quality. Results: Seventy-two RCTs were included. Overall reporting quality (mean adherence) were 53.56% and 45.71% on the CONSORT statement and its CHM formula extension, respectively. The strongest associations with reporting quality based on the CONSORT statement were multiple centers and larger author numbers. Compliance with the CHM formula extension, particularly regarding the disclosure of the targeted traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) pattern (s), was generally insufficient. Conclusion: The reporting quality of RCTs in CHM formulas for diabetes remains unsatisfactory, and the adherence to the CHM formula extension is even poorer. In order to ensure transparent and standardized reporting of RCTs, it is essential to advocate for or even mandate adherence of the CONSORT statement and its CHM formula extension when reporting trials in CHM formulas for diabetes by both authors and editors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Clinical trials are the gold standard for testing new therapies. Databases like ClinicalTrials.gov provide access to trial information, mainly covering the US and Europe. In 2006, WHO introduced the global ICTRP, aggregating data from ClinicalTrials.gov and 17 other national registers, making it the largest clinical trial platform by June 2019. This study conducts a comprehensive global analysis of the ICTRP database and provides framework for large-scale data analysis, data preparation, curation, and filtering. Materials and methods: The trends in 689,793 records from the ICTRP database (covering trials registered from 1990 to 2020) were analyzed. Records were adjusted for duplicates and mapping of agents to drug classes was performed. Several databases, including DrugBank, MESH, and the NIH Drug Information Portal were used to investigate trends in agent classes. Results: Our novel approach unveiled that 0.5% of the trials we identified were hidden duplicates, primarily originating from the EUCTR database, which accounted for 82.9% of these duplicates. However, the overall number of hidden duplicates within the ICTRP seems to be decreasing. In total, 689 793 trials (478 345 interventional) were registered in the ICTRP between 1990 and 2020, surpassing the count of trials in ClinicalTrials.gov (362 500 trials by the end of 2020). We identified 4 865 unique agents in trials with DrugBank, whereas 2 633 agents were identified with NIH Drug Information Portal data. After the ClinicalTrials.gov, EUCTR had the most trials in the ICTRP, followed by CTRI, IRCT, CHiCTR, and ISRCTN. CHiCTR displayed a significant surge in trial registration around 2015, while CTRI experienced rapid growth starting in 2016. Conclusion: This study highlights both the strengths and weaknesses of using the ICTRP as a data source for analyzing trends in clinical trials, and emphasizes the value of utilizing multiple registries for a comprehensive analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the top causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The review aimed to discuss and summarize the current evidence on the effectiveness of adjuvant neuroprotective treatments in terms of their effect on brain injury biomarkers in TBI patients. Methods: To identify relevant studies, four scholarly databases, including PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Google Scholar, were systematically searched using predefined search terms. English-language randomized controlled clinical trials reporting changes in brain injury biomarkers, namely, neuron-specific enolase (NSE), glial fibrillary acid protein (GFAP), ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal esterase L1 (UCHL1) and/or S100 beta (S100 ß), were included. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Results: A total of eleven studies with eight different therapeutic options were investigated; of them, tetracyclines, metformin, and memantine were discovered to be promising choices that could improve neurological outcomes in TBI patients. The most utilized serum biomarkers were NSE and S100 ß followed by GFAP, while none of the included studies quantified UCHL1. The heterogeneity in injury severity categories and measurement timing may affect the overall evaluation of the clinical efficacy of potential therapies. Therefore, unified measurement protocols are highly warranted to inform clinical decisions. Conclusion: Few therapeutic options showed promising results as an adjuvant to standard care in patients with TBI. Several considerations for future work must be directed towards standardizing monitoring biomarkers. Investigating the pharmacotherapy effectiveness using a multimodal biomarker panel is needed. Finally, employing stratified randomization in future clinical trials concerning potential confounders, including age, trauma severity levels, and type, is crucial to inform clinical decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common type of dementia in the elderly. Several hypotheses emerged from AD pathophysiological mechanisms. However, no neuronal protective or regenerative drug is available nowadays. Researchers still work in drug development and are finding new molecular targets to treat AD. Therefore, this study aimed to summarize main advances in AD pharmacological therapy. Clinical trials registered in the National Library of Medicine database were selected and analyzed accordingly to molecular targets, therapeutic effects, and safety profile. The most common outcome was the lack of efficacy. Only seven trials concluded that tested drugs were safe and induced any kind of therapeutic improvement. Three works showed therapeutic effects followed by toxicity. In addition to aducanumab recent FDA approval, antibodies against amyloid-β (Aβ) showed no noteworthy results. 5-HT6 antagonists, tau inhibitors and nicotinic agonists' data were discouraging. However, anti-Aβ vaccine, BACE inhibitor and anti-neuroinflammation drugs showed promising results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: drug repurposing; oncology; clinical trials; bioinformatics; database EN drug repurposing oncology clinical trials bioinformatics database 1 6 6 11/12/21 20211110 NES 211110 Introduction Drug repurposing is a strategy that seeks new medical treatments from existing licensed medications rather than from I de novo i development of new molecules. The ReDO Trials DB is the first database of repurposing trials focused solely on interventional trials of non-cancer drugs as new cancer treatments. In terms of the patent status, the ReDO database shows 287 drugs (80.6%) are off-patent, which is similar to the ReDO trials database with 134 of the 164 (81.7%) trials investigating ReDO drugs being off-patent. [Extracted from the article]

Background: The combination of strengthening Qi and eliminating pathogens is an available therapeutic principle in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) for primary liver cancer (PLC) at middle-advanced stage. However, there is a lack of reasonable evidence to support the proper application of this therapeutic principle. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Chinese medicinal formulas (CMFs), including two subgroup analyses of the principle of strengthening Qi and eliminating pathogens. Method: Clinical trials were obtained through searching of EMBASE, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, Chinese Scientific Journal Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and two clinical trial registries. The randomized controlled trials with the combination of CMFs and transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) in the experiment group were acceptable, in contrast to the TACE alone in the control group. The statistics analysis was performed on Review Manager 5.4. Results: A total of eligible 24 trials were accessed in this work. Overall, CMFs could improve the survival duration of 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years, Karnofsky Performance Status, tumor objective response rate (ORR), AFP, and symptom. In the subgroup analysis, trials complying with the principle of single strengthening Qi did not show any significant difference in increasing tumor ORR. Meanwhile, the principle of combined strengthening Qi and eliminating pathogens was uncertain in improving symptoms and 1-year and 2-year survival time. In addition, the outcome indexes of ALT and AST were heterogeneous. In last, the total occurrence of adverse events could not be reduced via using CMFs. Patients treated with CMFs exhibited liver injury, fever, and white blood cell decline, with mild events occurring more frequently and severe events occurring less. Conclusion: CMFs are an effective treatment method to cure PLC at the middle-advanced stage. Adopting the principle of single strengthening Qi presents better efficacy in the long term by prolonging the survival duration. Following the principle of combined strengthening Qi and eliminating pathogens could be more beneficial to patients in short term by lessening the tumor size. CMFs have the advantage of reducing certain serious adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]