Efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine for depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

To conduct a systematic review to assess the current evidence available for the effectiveness and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for depression. An electronic search was conducted in eight databases from inception until April 2018. Randomized controlled trials with risk of bias (RoB) score ≥ 4 according to the Cochrane RoB tool were included for analyses. The primary outcome was the severity of depression. The secondary outcomes were total effective rate (TER) and adverse events. The minimally important difference (MID) of the severity of depression was a reduction in the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression 17 items (HAMD-17) scores by 4. RevMan 5.3 Software was used for data analyses. GRADE system was used to assess the certainty of evidence. A total of 40 eligible studies with 3549 subjects were identified. Meta-analyses showed that CHM monotherapy had better clinically effects than placebo according to HAMD-17 score (Mean Difference (MD) = -4.53, 95% CI (-5.69, -3.37), P < 0.00001; Certainty of evidence: Moderate) and TER (Risk Ratio (RR) = 2.15, 95% CI (1.61, 2.88), P < 0.00001, Certainty of evidence: Low). Meta-analyses showed that CHM was as effective as western conventional medications (WCM) in TER (RR = 0.99, 95% CI (0.95, 1.02), P = 0.41, Certainty of evidence: High) and in reducing HAMD-17 score (MD = 0.44, 95% CI (-0.11, 0.99), P = 0.12, Certainty of evidence: Moderate). Meta-analyses showed that CHM in combination with WCM was better than WCM in TER (RR = 1.16, 95% CI (1.07, 1.27), P = 0.0004, Certainty of evidence: High), while had comparable clinically effects with WCM according to HAMD-17 score (MD = -2.51, 95% CI (-3.24, -1.77), P < 0.00001, Certainty of evidence: Moderate). In additional, CHM were associated with less adverse events than WCM, and adding CHM to WCM reduced adverse events. The findings of present systematic review, at least to a certain extent, provided supporting evidence for the routine use of CHM for depression.

Wang Y ，Shi YH ，Xu Z ，Fu H ，Zeng H ，Zheng GQ ... -  《-》

Comparison between herbal medicine and fluoxetine for depression: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) versus fluoxetine on depression. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RCT with two parallel groups that compared CHM and fluoxetine on treatment of depression with reported decreased Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) and adverse events during treatment were included after searching through six electric-databases. The methodological quality of RCTs was assessed according to the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 software with pooled mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) if no significant heterogeneity was detected. A SOF table was generated using GRADEPro software to evaluate the overall quality of the evidence. Twenty-six trials with 3294 participants were included in the review. Most of them had high risk of bias during conducting and reporting. The results achieved weak evidence which showed CHM had similar effect to fluoxetine (20mg/day) on relieving depression according to HAMD assessment (for primary depression: MD=-0.08, 95%CI -0.98-0.82; for secondary depression: MD=-0.36, 95%CI -1.55-0.83), but fewer incidences of adverse events than the drug (for primary depression: RR=0.31, 95%CI 0.17-0.59; for post-stroke depression: RR=0.04, 95%CI 0.00-0.25). No serious adverse event was found in neither CHM nor fluoxetine group. Due to the poor quality of included trials and the potential publication bias of this review, no confirmed conclusion could be draw to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of CHM for depression compared with fluoxetine.

Ren Y ，Zhu C ，Wu J ，Zheng R ，Cao H ... -  《-》

Erxian decoction, a Chinese herbal formula, for menopausal syndrome: An updated systematic review.

Erxian decoction (EXD), a famous Chinese herbal prescription, consists of Rhizoma Curculiginis, Herba Epimedii, Radix Morindae Officinalis, Radix Angelicae Sinensis, Cortex Phellodendri, Rhizoma Anemarrhenae, all of which are recorded in the Chinese Pharmacopoeia. To conduct an updated systematic and meta-analysis investigating efficacy and safety of EXD for menopausal syndrome. An electronic search was conducted in eight databases from inception until July 2018. Randomized controlled trials with risk-of-bias score ≥ 7 according to the Cochrane Back Review Group were included for analyses. All participants with a diagnosis of menopausal syndrome met the established criteria. The treatment group was EXD monotherapy or adjunct therapy. Comparators were placebo, hormone replace therapy, hormone plus nonhormonal agents, nonhormonal agents and no treatment. The primary outcome measurements were the Kupperman index, total hot flush scores, total menopause rating scale (MRS) scores and total menopause-specific quality of life (MENQOL) scores. The secondary outcomes were total clinical effective rate, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) syndrome scores, Hamilton depression (HAMD) scale scores, self-rating depression scale (SDS) scores, self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) scores, athens insomnia scale (AIS) scores, serological indicators, blood pressure, and adverse events. RevMan 5.3 Software was used for data analyses. GRADE system was used to assess the level of evidence. Sixteen eligible studies with 1594 subjects were identified. Five studies showed EXD was contradictory results according to Kupperman index of menopausal syndrome compared with hormone. One study showed EXD significantly improved total hot flush scores, total MRS scores and total MENQOL scores compared with placebo (P < 0.05). Meta-analysis of 10 EXD monotherapy or 2 paratherapy studies showed that both can significantly improve total effective rate compared with hormone (P < 0.05); 3 studies showed that EXD plus hormone significantly reduces the TCM syndrome scores, HAMD scale scores, SDS scores and SAS scores compared with hormone (P < 0.05). One study showed a significant effect of EXD for reducing AIS scores compared with hormone (P < 0.05); 7 studies showed contradictory effects for improving serological indicators compared with hormone. Two studies reported adverse effects, whereas the other studies did not mention. The quality of the evidence of primary outcomes was moderate to high according to the GRADE profiler. The present findings do not allow an assessment of the evidence because the low-quality studies included cannot be reproduced. However, we identified an area, which is worthy of further research. Rigorous RCTs are still needed in the future.

Wang Y ，Lou XT ，Shi YH ，Tong Q ，Zheng GQ ... -  《-》

Updated clinical evidence of Chinese herbal medicine for insomnia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

This systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for people with insomnia. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating oral CHM alone or in combination with conventional therapies for primary insomnia were identified by searching English and Chinese publications and databases of clinical trial registration. Risk of bias was assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook 5.1. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.2.4. Seventy-nine trials (7886 participants) were finally included in the review, and 76 were included in the meta-analysis. Twenty-seven trials reported the methods of random sequence generation, and five of them used the allocation concealment. Blinding of participants and personnel were used in 10 studies. The main meta-analysis showed that CHM alone was more effective than placebo by reducing scores of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (mean difference, MD: -3.06, 95% confidence interval, CI: -5.14 to -0.98, I(2) = 97%) and benzodiazepine drugs (BZDs) (MD: -1.94, 95% CI: -2.45 to -1.43, I(2) = 96%). The effect was also seen when CHM was combined with BZDs compared with placebo plus BZDs (MD: -1.88, 95% CI: -2.78 to -0.97, I(2) = 0%) or cognitive and behavioral therapy (MD: -3.80, 95% CI: -4.91 to -2.68, I(2) = 68%) alone. There was no significant difference between CHM and placebo regarding the frequency of adverse events (relative risk, RR: 1.65, 95% CI: 0.67-4.10, I(2) = 0). Overall, oral CHM used as a monotherapy or as an adjunct to conventional therapies appears safe, and it may improve subjective sleep in people with insomnia. However, the typical effect of CHM for insomnia cannot be determined due to heterogeneity. Further study focusing on individual CHM formula for insomnia is needed. The development of a comparable placebo is also needed to improve the successful blinding in RCTs.

Ni X ，Shergis JL ，Guo X ，Zhang AL ，Li Y ，Lu C ，Xue CC ... -  《-》

Chinese herbal medicine for endometriosis.

Flower A ，Liu JP ，Lewith G ，Little P ，Li Q ... -  《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》