Analysis on herbal medicines utilized for treatment of COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Luo L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7251357 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundTo evaluate the evidence behind claims that Chinese Herbal Medicine, specifically "three medicines and three formulations" (3M3F, comprising Jinhua Qinggan, Lianhua Qingwen, Xuebijing, Qingfei Paidu, Huashi Baidu, and Xuanfei Baidu), is an effective treatment for COVID-19.MethodsWe searched PubMed, MEDLINE and CNKI databases, preprint servers, clinical trial registries and supplementary sources for Chinese- or English-language randomized trials or non-randomized studies with comparator groups, which tested the constituents of 3M3F in the treatment of COVID-19 up to September 2020. Primary outcome was change in disease severity. Secondary outcomes included various symptoms. Meta-analysis (using generic inverse variance random effects model) was performed when there were two or more studies reporting on the same symptom.ResultsOf 607 articles identified, 13 primary studies (6 RCTs and 7 retrospective non-randomized comparative studies) with 1467 participants met our final inclusion criteria. Studies were small and had significant methodological limitations, most notably potential bias in assessment of outcomes. No study convincingly demonstrated a statistically significant impact on change in disease severity. Eight studies reported sufficiently similar secondary outcomes to be included in a meta-analysis. Some statistically significant impacts on symptoms, chest CT manifestations, laboratory variables and length of stay were demonstrated, but such findings were sparse and many remain unreplicated.ConclusionsThese findings neither support nor refute the claim that 3M3F alters the severity of COVID-19 or alleviates symptoms. More rigorous studies are required to properly ascertain the potential role of Chinese Herbal Medicine in COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8657519 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has already taken the lives of more than 2 million people worldwide, causing several political and socio-economic disturbances in our daily life. At the time of publication, there are non-effective pharmacological treatments, and vaccine distribution represents an important challenge for all countries. In this sense, research for novel molecules becomes essential to develop treatments against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. In this context, Mexican natural products have proven to be quite useful for drug development; therefore, in the present study, we perform an in silico screening of 100 compounds isolated from the most commonly used Mexican plants, against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. As results, we identify ten compounds that meet leadlikeness criteria (emodin anthrone, kaempferol, quercetin, aesculin, cichoriin, luteolin, matricin, riolozatrione, monocaffeoyl tartaric acid, aucubin). According to the docking analysis, only three compounds target the key proteins of SARS-CoV-2 (quercetin, riolozatrione and cichoriin), but only one appears to be safe (cichoriin). ADME (absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion) properties and the physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model show that cichoriin reaches higher lung levels (100 mg/Kg, IV); therefore, it may be considered in developing therapeutic tools.
| S-EPMC7913859 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrompted by the Covid-19 pandemic and the need to ensure timely and safe access to medicines during a pandemic, the aim of this study was to compare and contrast the EU and US regulations, processes, and outcomes pertaining to the granting of accelerated Marketing Authorizations (MAs) for COVID-19 vaccines and treatments with a view to determining how effective these regulations were in delivering safe medicines in a timely manner.MethodsMAs for medicines approved for Covid-related indications in the first two pandemic years (March 2020-February 2022) were identified using the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) websites. Authorization reports and utilized regulations were reviewed to determine and compare approval timelines, facilitated pathways, accepted clinical evidence, and effectiveness of the regulations by assessing them against time and safety standards.ResultsBy the end of February 2022, the EMA and FDA had granted 12 and 14 MAs, respectively. Two EU and two US approvals were issued in relation to new indications for already-approved treatments; the remaining ones were first-time approvals of novel vaccines and treatments. The median time to approval was 24 days for the EMA's conditional MAs and 36 days for the USFDA's Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA) for all Covid-19 medicines. This is compared with 23 and 28 days, respectively, specifically for first-time novel vaccines and treatments authorized by both USFDA and EMA. The USFDA and EMA differed markedly in terms of the time taken to approve new indications of already-approved treatment; the USFDA took 65 days for such approval, compared with 133 days for the EMA. Where MAs were issued by both authorities, USFDA approvals were issued before EMA approvals; applications for approval were submitted to the FDA before submission to the EMA. Three EU and two US MAs were based on data from two or more phase 3 clinical trials; the remaining ones were based on single trial data. Only six EU and four US trials had been completed by the time of authorization. This was in line with regulations. While the applicable regulations shared many similarities, there were marked differences. For instance, the EU's conditional MA regulation pertains only to first approvals of new treatments. It does not cover new indications of already-approved treatments. This contrasts with the US, where the EUA regulation applies to both types of applications, something that may have impacted approval timelines. Overall, both EU and US utilized regulations were considered to be effective. For most cases, utilizing such regulations for Covid-19 MAs resulted in faster approval timelines compared to standard MAs. They were flexible enough to manage the process of granting emergency approvals while maintaining strict requirements and allowing comprehensive reviews of the supporting evidence.ConclusionUS and EU regulations were effective in ensuring timely accelerated market access to Covid-19 medicines during the pandemic without compromising the approval standards related to safety or efficacy. The population in both regions will receive comparable access to medicines during a pandemic if sponsors submit their applications to both authorities in parallel.
| S-EPMC10764419 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The epidemic of pneumonia (COVID-19) caused by novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) infection has been listed as a public health emergency of international concern by the World Health Organization (WHO), and its harm degree is defined as a global "pandemic". At present, the efforts of various countries focus on the rapid diagnosis and isolation of patients, as well as to find a treatment that can combat the most serious impact of the disease. The number of reported COVID-19 virus infections is still increasing. Unfortunately, no drugs or vaccines have been approved for the treatment of human coronaviruses, but there is an urgent need for in-depth research on emerging human infectious coronaviruses. Clarification transmission routes and pathogenic mechanisms, and identification of potential drug treatment targets will promote the development of effective prevention and treatment measures. In the absence of confirmed effective treatments, due to public health emergencies, it is essential to study the possible effects of existing approved antivirals drugs or Chinese herbal medicines for SARS-CoV-2. This review summarizes the epidemiological characteristics, pathogenesis, virus structure and targeting strategies of COVID-19. Meanwhile, this review also focus on the re-purposing of clinically approved drugs and Chinese herbal medicines that may be used to treat COVID-19 and provide new ideas for the discovery of small molecular compounds with potential therapeutic effects on novel COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7237953 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Current recommendations for the self-management of SARS-Cov-2 disease (COVID-19) include self-isolation, rest, hydration, and the use of NSAID in case of high fever only. It is expected that many patients will add other symptomatic/adjuvant treatments, such as herbal medicines. Aims:To provide a benefits/risks assessment of selected herbal medicines traditionally indicated for "respiratory diseases" within the current frame of the COVID-19 pandemic as an adjuvant treatment. Method:The plant selection was primarily based on species listed by the WHO and EMA, but some other herbal remedies were considered due to their widespread use in respiratory conditions. Preclinical and clinical data on their efficacy and safety were collected from authoritative sources. The target population were adults with early and mild flu symptoms without underlying conditions. These were evaluated according to a modified PrOACT-URL method with paracetamol, ibuprofen, and codeine as reference drugs. The benefits/risks balance of the treatments was classified as positive, promising, negative, and unknown. Results:A total of 39 herbal medicines were identified as very likely to appeal to the COVID-19 patient. According to our method, the benefits/risks assessment of the herbal medicines was found to be positive in 5 cases (Althaea officinalis, Commiphora molmol, Glycyrrhiza glabra, Hedera helix, and Sambucus nigra), promising in 12 cases (Allium sativum, Andrographis paniculata, Echinacea angustifolia, Echinacea purpurea, Eucalyptus globulus essential oil, Justicia pectoralis, Magnolia officinalis, Mikania glomerata, Pelargonium sidoides, Pimpinella anisum, Salix sp, Zingiber officinale), and unknown for the rest. On the same grounds, only ibuprofen resulted promising, but we could not find compelling evidence to endorse the use of paracetamol and/or codeine. Conclusions:Our work suggests that several herbal medicines have safety margins superior to those of reference drugs and enough levels of evidence to start a clinical discussion about their potential use as adjuvants in the treatment of early/mild common flu in otherwise healthy adults within the context of COVID-19. While these herbal medicines will not cure or prevent the flu, they may both improve general patient well-being and offer them an opportunity to personalize the therapeutic approaches.
| S-EPMC7542597 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Natural herbs, which contain pharmacologically active compounds, have been used historically as medicines. Conventionally, the analysis of chemical components in herbal medicines requires time-consuming sample separation and state-of-the-art analytical instruments. Nanopore, a versatile single molecule sensor, might be suitable to identify bioactive compounds in natural herbs. Here, a phenylboronic acid appended Mycobacterium smegmatis porin A (MspA) nanopore is used as a sensor for herbal medicines. A variety of bioactive compounds based on salvianolic acids, including caffeic acid, protocatechuic acid, protocatechualdehyde, salvianic acid A, rosmarinic acid, lithospermic acid, salvianolic acid A and salvianolic acid B are identified. Using a custom machine learning algorithm, analyte identification is performed with an accuracy of 99.0%. This sensing principle is further used with natural herbs such as Salvia miltiorrhiza, Rosemary and Prunella vulgaris. No complex sample separation or purification is required and the sensing device is highly portable.
| S-EPMC10915175 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimThe management of the worldwide spreading COVID-19 consists of amelioration of its symptoms but no cure is yet available. Herbal medicines supplemented with the Western medicine have been applied for COVID-19 treatment in India, China, Iran, and other countries. This systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs evaluates the effect and safety of herbal intervention in the management of COVID-19.Experimental procedureRCTs from databases like PubMed, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, Science Direct, CTRI, AYUSH Research Portal, India, were reviewed and the data were extracted for study sample demographics, intervention details, clinical effect, inflammatory markers and safety monitoring. Outcomes were expressed as Risk-ratio (RR) with 95% CI for dichotomous data, and Mean-Difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous data.Result and conclusionFrom the 32 eligible studies, a total of 3177 COVID-19 patients were included in the review. Herbal intervention as an adjuvant to Western medicine causes significantly higher improvement compared to Western medicine alone [Fever (RR = 1.09 CI 1.03, 1.15), Cough (Risk-Ratio = 1.22 CI 1.08, 1.37), Fatigue (Risk-Ratio = 1.27 CI 1.11, 1.44), Chest CT Improvement (Risk-Ratio = 1.15 CI 1.08, 1.23)]. The laboratory parameters were also better in the herbal medicine group compared to standard care group only WBC (MD = 0.36 CI 0.16, 0.55), Lymphocyte percentage (MD = 5.48 CI 3.05, 7.92), Absolute lymphocyte count (MD = 0.23 CI 0.07, 0.39), CRP (MD = -5.66 CI -7.96, -3.37). However, duration of hospital stays (MD = -1.82 CI -3.84, 0.21); IL-6 (MD = -3.67 CI -8.76, 1.43), ESR Level (MD = -10.38 CI -25.96, 5.21) were statistically insignificant. No significant adverse events for herbal medications were noted in the included RCTs, during the time of the studies. (n = 665, RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.76, 1.14).
| S-EPMC8747767 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC527695 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHypercholesterolemia is an important key contributory factor for ischemic heart disease and is associated with age, high blood pressure, a family history of hypercholesterolemia, and diabetes. Chinese herbal medicines have been used for a long time as lipid-lowering agents.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of Chinese herbal medicines on hypercholesterolemia.Search strategyWe searched the following databases: The Cochrane Library (issue 8, 2010), MEDLINE (until July 2010), EMBASE (until July 2010 ), Chinese BioMedical Database (until July 2010), Traditional Chinese Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System (until July 2010), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (until July 2010), Chinese VIP Information (until July 2010), Chinese Academic Conference Papers Database and Chinese Dissertation Database (until July 2010), and Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (until July 2010).Selection criteriaWe considered randomized controlled clinical trials in hypercholesterolemic participants comparing Chinese herbal medicines with placebo, no treatment, and pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We resolved any disagreements with this assessment through discussion and a decision was achieved based by consensus. We assessed trials for the risk of bias against key criteria: random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of participants, incomplete outcome data, selective outcome reporting and other sources of bias.Main resultsWe included 22 randomized trials (2130 participants). The mean treatment duration was 2.3 ± 1.3 months (ranging from one to six months). Twenty trials were conducted in China and 18 trials were published in Chinese. Overall, the risk of bias of included trials was high or unclear. Five different herbal medicines were evaluated in the included trials, which compared herbs with conventional medicine in six comparisons (20 trials), or placebo (two trials). There were no outcome data in any of the trials on cardiovascular events and death from any cause. One trial each reported well-being (no significant differences) and economic costs. No serious adverse events were observed. Xuezhikang was the most commonly used herbal formula investigated. A significant effect on total cholesterol (two trial, 254 participants) was shown in favor of Xuezhikang when compared with inositol nicotinate (mean difference (MD) -0.90 mmol/L, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.13 to -0.68) .Authors' conclusionsSome herbal medicines may have cholesterol-lowering effects. Our findings have to be interpreted with caution due to high or unclear risk of bias of the included trials.
| S-EPMC3402023 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SARS-CoV-2 is the latest worldwide pandemic declared by the World Health Organization and there is no established anti-COVID-19 drug to combat this notorious situation except some recently approved vaccines. By affecting the global public health sector, this viral infection has created a disastrous situation associated with high morbidity and mortality rates along with remarkable cases of hospitalization because of its tendency to be high infective. These challenges forced researchers and leading pharmaceutical companies to find and develop cures for this novel strain of coronavirus. Besides, plants have a proven history of being notable wellsprings of potential drugs, including antiviral, antibacterial, and anticancer therapies. As a continuation of this approach, plant-based preparations and bioactive metabolites along with a notable number of traditional medicines, bioactive phytochemicals, traditional Chinese medicines, nutraceuticals, Ayurvedic preparations, and other plant-based products are being explored as possible therapeutics against COVID-19. Moreover, the unavailability of effective medicines against COVID-19 has driven researchers and members of the pharmaceutical, herbal, and related industries to conduct extensive investigations of plant-based products, especially those that have already shown antiviral properties. Even the recent invention of several vaccines has not eliminated doubts about safety and efficacy. As a consequence, many limited, unregulated clinical trials involving conventional mono- and poly-herbal therapies are being conducted in various areas of the world. Of the many clinical trials to establish such agents as credentialed sources of anti-COVID-19 medications, only a few have reached the landmark of completion. In this review, we have highlighted and focused on plant-based anti-COVID-19 clinical trials found in several scientific and authenticated databases. The aim is to allow researchers and innovators to identify promising and prospective anti-COVID-19 agents in clinical trials (either completed or recruiting) to establish them as novel therapies to address this unwanted pandemic.
| S-EPMC8194295 | biostudies-literature