Search

Network Meta-analysis and multi-criteria decision analysis(MCDA) model were performed to evaluate the benefit-risk of Compound Cantharis Capsules, Huisheng Oral Solution, and Jinlong Capsules in the adjuvant treatment of primary liver cancer(PLC). The randomized controlled trial(RCT) of Compound Cantharis Capsules, Huisheng Oral Solution, and Jinlong Capsules in treating PLC were retrieved from CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane Library. R 4.2 was employed to conduct a network Meta-analysis, on the basis of which the effect values of the three medicines were obtained by indirect comparison. MCDA was performed to establish the value tree based on the benefit-risk indexes. Hiview 3.2 was used to calculate the benefit values, risk values, and benefit-risk values of the three medicines in treating PLC, and a sensitivity analysis was carried out to evaluate the robustness of the results. Oracle Crystal Ball 11.1 was employed to optimize the evaluation results by Monte Carlo simulation. A total of 39 RCTs were included. The results showed that Compound Cantharis Capsules, Huisheng Oral Solution, and Jinlong Capsules combined with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization(TACE) had the benefit values of 45, 51 and 45, the risk values of 59, 47, and 41, and the benefit-risk values of 52, 49, and 43, respectively. The benefit-risk differences and [95%CI] of Compound Cantharis Capsules vs Huisheng Oral Solution, Compound Cantharis Capsules vs Jinlong Capsules, and Huisheng Oral Solution vs Jinlong Capsules were 3.00[-13.09, 21.82], 9.00[-4.39, 24.62], and 6.00[-8.84, 20.28], respectively. Based on the results of MCDA, Huisheng Oral Solution, Jinlong Capsules, and Compound Cantharis Capsules combined with TACE had the greatest benefit, the greatest risk, and the best overall benefit, respectively. Considering the efficacy and safety, the priority of the three oral Chinese patent medicines combined with TACE for treating PLC followed the trend of Compound Cantharis Capsules, Huisheng Oral Solution, and Jinlong Capsules.

Rich experience of clinical diagnosis and treatment has been accumulated in the developmental history of Chinese medicine, and the efficacy has been increasingly accepted by the public. However, the evaluation of clinical efficacy is currently based more on scientific evidence instead of merely the changes of patient symptoms. In Chinese medicine, the changes of major disease indicators, patient symptoms, and pathogenesis are the major criteria for the evaluation of clinical efficacy. The lack of well-accepted and uniform criteria and the uncertainty of subjective evaluation limit the development of clinical Chinese medicine. Evidence-based medicine combines clinical skills with the current best evidence. Narrative medicine, utilizing people's narratives in clinical practice, emphasizes patient feelings, willingness, and value orientation. The introduction of both evidence-based medicine and narrative medicine into the evaluation of clinical efficacy refers to the construction of the clinical efficacy evaluation system in a paradigm of participatory diagnosis and treatment. It can fully reflect the characteristics of Chinese medicine, respect the values of patients, and achieve universal clinical evidence. Therefore, it helps to improve the diagnosis and treatment, the relationship between doctors and patients, patients' life quality and decision-making awareness, and finally the new evaluation model of clinical efficacy of Chinese medicine.

Network Meta-analysis was used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different oral Chinese patent medicines combined with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization(TACE) in the treatment of primary liver cancer. Randomized controlled trials of oral Chinese patent medicines for primary liver cancer were retrieved from CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, SinoMed, PubMed, Cochrane Library and EMbase databases from inception to May 2020. According to the Cochrane recommendation standard, the quality of the included articles was evaluated, and the data were analyzed by RevMan, R software and GeMTC software. A total of 10 kinds of oral Chinese patent medicines and 68 RCTs were included. Network Meta-analysis results showed that: as compared with TACE alone, 10 kinds of oral Chinese patent medicines combined with TACE showed advantages in effective rate, 1-year survival rate, 2-year survival rate, KPS score improvement rate and reduced adverse reaction incidence. In the pairwise comparison of oral Chinese patent medicines, the results showed that Cidan Capsules were superior to Jinlong Capsules and Xihuang Pills in 1-year survival rate. According to the probabi-lity ranking results: Shenyi Capsules and Ganfule were more obvious in improving the effective rate; Cidan Capsules and Shenyi Capsules were more effective in improving the 1-year survival rate; Pingxiao Capsules and Shenyi Capsules had better efficacy in improving 2-year survival rate; Huaier Granules and Shenyi Capsules had better efficacy in improving the quality of life; Huisheng Oral Liquid and Ganfule were more effective in reducing the incidence of adverse reactions(such as nausea, vomiting and leukocytosis). The current evidence showed that oral Chinese patent medicine combined with TACE was superior to TACE alone in efficacy and safety. In terms of the effective rate, 1-year survival rate, 2-year survival rate, KPS score improvement rate and reduced adverse reaction incidence, the optimal treatment measures were Shenyi Capsules, Cidan Capsules, Pingxiao Capsules, Huaier Granules and Huisheng Oral Liquid in turn. However, due to the limitations of the research, the current level of evidence is not high, and clear conclusions and evi-dence strength still need to be further verified and improved by high-quality researches.

To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of Huaier Granules in the adjuvant treatment of primary liver cancer. The databases of CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, CBMdisc, PubMed, Cochrane Library and EMbase were searched by computer to screen out the randomized controlled trial on Huaier Granules combined with Western medicine in the treatment of primary liver cancer from the establishment of the databases to January 2020. Data extraction and quality evaluation were conducted for the included literature. Meta-analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.3 software, and evidence quality evaluation was conducted for the outcomes by GRADE profiler software. A total of 24 articles were included, with a total sample size of 2 664 cases. Meta-analysis showed that as compared with Western medicine alone, Huaier Granules combined with Western medicine could improve the objective remission rate(RR=1.38, 95%CI[1.26, 1.51], P<0.000 01), disease control rate(RR=1.29, 95%CI[1.10, 1.52], P=0.002) and 6-month survival rate(RR=1.20, 95%CI[1.10, 1.32], P<0.000 1), 1-year survival rate(RR=1.39, 95%CI[1.23, 1.58], P<0.000 01), 2-year survival rate(RR=1.95, 95%CI[1.28, 2.96], P=0.002), KPS score(MD=17.15, 95%CI[6.47, 27.83], P=0.002) and the improvement rate of KPS score(RR=2.02, 95%CI[1.47, 2.77], P<0.000 1), AFP decline rate(RR=1.40, 95%CI[1.20, 1.62], P<0.000 1), CD3~+(MD=17.34, 95%CI[9.28, 25.40], P<0.000 1), CD4~+(MD=8.62, 95%CI[1.59, 15.64], P=0.02), CD8~+(MD=1.95, 95%CI[-3.93, 7.82], P=0.52), CD4~+/CD8~+(MD=0.42, 95%CI[-0.33, 1.17], P=0.27); reduce the level of AFP(MD=-71.57, 95%CI[-80.42,-62.72], P<0.000 01), recurrence rate(RR=0.76, 95%CI[0.67, 0.85], P<0.000 01), and incidence of adverse reactions(RR=0.60, 95%CI[0.41, 0.89], P=0.01) in patients with primary liver cancer. According to the GRADE system, the evidence for outcome measures was low to very low. The results show that Huaier Granules have certain efficacy and high safety in adjuvant treatment of primary liver cancer, but its effect in reducing adverse reactions and improve immunity remains to be verified. Due to the poor quality of the included studies and evidences, the conclusions still need to be further verified by multi-center, large sample, and randomized double-blind controlled studies.

Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is a very practical subject, which has its unique theoretical system and clinical characteristics. In the course of clinical practice, the exact clinical efficacy is the key of existence and development. But the existing evaluation system is difficult to objectively evaluate the clinical efficacy of TCM. Therefore, how to objectively evaluate the clinical efficacy and get definitive evidence is the focus of the evaluation of clinical efficacy of TCM. Relative to modern medicine, TCM is more concerned about the changes of feelings and clinical symptoms of the patient in the course of the evolution of the disease. Soft targets mainly used for the evaluation of the clinical efficacy of symptoms and functional activity of the disease. The level in soft targets of processing technology is often used methods in clinical evaluation. But it has often produced the phenomenon which the results of the evaluation is mutual contradiction, which will ultimately affect the effect of evaluation of clinical efficacy of TCM. In order to better evaluate the clinical efficacy of TCM, in the process of adoption of soft targets, it clearly identify it's role, highlighting the characteristics of interventions on disease, and as much as possibly avoid the level in soft targets of processing technology to real assess clinical efficacy of TCM.

Data authenticity is the basic requirement of clinical studies. In actual clinical conditions how to establish formatted case report forms (CRF) in line with the requirement for data authenticity is the key to ensure clinical data quality. On the basis of the characteristics of clinical data in actual clinical conditions, we determined elements for establishing formatted case report forms by comparing differences in data characteristics of CRFs in traditional clinical studies and in actual clinical conditions, and then generated formatted case report forms in line with the requirement for data authenticity in actual clinical conditions. The data of formatted CRFs generated in this study could not only meet the requirement for data authenticity of clinical studies in actual clinical conditions, but also comply with data management practices for clinical studies, thus it is deemed as a progress in technical methods.