Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Mar;97(12):e0127.
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000010127.

Which are the best Chinese herbal injections combined with XELOX regimen for gastric cancer?: A PRISMA-compliant network meta-analysis

Affiliations

Which are the best Chinese herbal injections combined with XELOX regimen for gastric cancer?: A PRISMA-compliant network meta-analysis

Dan Zhang et al. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Mar.

Abstract

Background: The optimal Chinese herbal injections (CHIs) combined with XELOX regimen for patients with gastric cancer remains elusive. The aim of our network meta-analysis (NMA) is to explore the best options among different CHIs for gastric cancer.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database (CNKI), Wan-fang Database, Cqvip Database (VIP), China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc) were searched to identify RCTs which focused on CHIs against gastric cancer. The quality assessment of included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted by the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Standard pair-wise and Bayesian NMAs were performed to compare the efficacy and safety of different CHIs combined with the XELOX regimen via Stata 13.0 and WinBUGS1.4 software.

Results: A total of 2316 records were searched, the network of evidence included 26 eligible RCTs involving 13 types of CHIs and 2154 patients. The results suggested that Shenqifuzheng+ XELOX, Huachansu+ XELOX, Kangai+ XELOX, Javanica oil emulsion+ XELOX, Aidi injection+ XELOX might be the optimal treatment for gastric cancer in improving the performance status than using XELOX regimen single, with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of 2.74 (1.24, 6.17), 8.27 (1.74, 42.43), 4.28 (1.80, 10.48), 5.14 (1.87, 16.28), 0.20 (0.090, 0.44). At the aspects of ADRs (adverse reactions), Compound Kushen+ XELOX, Lentinan+ XELOX, Xiaoaiping injection+ XELOX could obviously relieve leukopenia than only receiving XELOX regimen, and their ORs and 95% CIs were 5.62 (1.41, 36.24), 8.16 (2.25, 29.43), 5.69 (1.85, 15.77). Furthermore, Disodium cantharidinate and vitamin B6+ XELOX, Shenqifuzheng+ XELOX, Kangai+ XELOX, Lentinan+ XELOX could obviously relieve the nausea and vomiting than receiving the XELOX regimen alone, with ORs and 95% CIs of 5.29 (1.30, 23.96), 2.50 (1.16, 5.26), 2.42 (1.06, 5.63), 9.04 (3.24, 26.73). Nevertheless, CHIs combined with XELOX regimen did not confer higher better clinical effectiveness rate over receiving XELOX regimen alone, with nonstatistically significant between-group differences.

Conclusions: As the available evidence suggested that CHIs combined with XELOX regimen could provide treatment benefits for patients with gastric cancer. Among 13 types of CHIs, Javanica oil emulsion and Compound Kushen injection is the optimal treatment in improving the clinical effectiveness rate and performance status, and Lentinan injection was superior in relieving ADRs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of the search for eligible studies.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Network graph for 4 outcomes in this network meta-analysis. Note: (A) The clinical effectiveness rate; (B) performance status; (C) leucopenia; (D) nausea and vomiting. Node sizes indicate total sample sizes for treatments. Line thicknesses correspond to the number of trials used for comparisons.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Risk of bias graph.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Rank of different treatment groups for efficacy outcomes. Note: (A) The clinical effectiveness rate; (B) performance status.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Rank of different treatment groups for ADRs. Note: (C) Leucopenia; (D) nausea and vomiting.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Cluster analysis plots of 4 outcomes. Note: (A) The clinical effectiveness rate and performance status (X-axis: the clinical effectiveness rate; Y-axis: performance status); (B) ADRs (X-axis: leukopenia; Y-axis: nausea and vomiting.).
Figure 7
Figure 7
Funnel plot of performance status.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Hamashima C. Current issues and future perspectives of gastric cancer screening. World J Gastroenterol 2014;20:13767–74. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 2015;65:87–108. - PubMed
    1. Rahman R, Asombang AW, Ibdah JA. Characteristics of gastric cancer in Asia. World J Gastroenterol 2014;20:4483–90. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fock KM, Ang TL. Epidemiology of Helicobacter pylori infection and gastric cancer in Asia. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010;25:479–86. - PubMed
    1. Orditura M, Galizia G, Sforza V, et al. Treatment of gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol 2014;7:1635–49. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Supplementary concepts