Comparative efficacy of commercial oral poly-herbal traditional Chinese medicine formulations combined with western medicine in benign prostatic hyperplasia management: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Hengda Zeng,Ziqiao Wang,Weian Zhu,Xiaoyang Li,Bohao Liu,Chuhao Chen,Peiying Huang,Yun Luo
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2024.1358340
IF: 5.6
2024-06-05
Frontiers in Pharmacology
Abstract:Background: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is prevalent among the aging male population and often presents with distressing lower urinary tract symptoms. There is emerging evidence that commercial oral poly-herbal traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) formulation combined with Western medicine (WM) may offer enhanced therapeutic effects compared to WM alone in BPH treatment. Nevertheless, determining the optimal formulations for BPH remains controversial. We aimed to employ a network meta-analysis to compare and assess differences among commonly used and recommended poly-herbal TCM formulations outlined in the Chinese guidelines for BPH treatment, providing clinical medication recommendations and guidance. Methods: We extensively searched for RCTs of BPH patients that had oral poly-herbal TCM formulations and WM treatment, covering both English and Chinese databases up to 31 October 2023. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool Version 2 (ROB2). A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to assess the effectiveness of various formulations, followed by sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Results: Our meta-analysis included 107 RCTs involving 11,037 patients across 16 oral poly-herbal TCM formulations. The quality of the selected studies was assessed as "Some concerns". Most formulations combined with WM demonstrated superior therapeutic efficacy compared to WM alone. For clinical effective rate, Jingui Shenqi pill (JGSQ) + WM had the highest-ranking probability (87.38%). Concerning International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and maximum flow rate of urine, Guizhi Fuling capsule (GZFL) + WM was most effective (91.10% and 98.55%). Regarding the quality of life score and postvoid residual urine, Pulean tablet (PLA) + WM ranked first (86.71% and 91.81%). In controlling prostate volume, Huange capsule (HE) + WM demonstrated the highest efficacy (95.65%). Additionally, among the interventions, Lingze (LZ) + WM capsule exhibited the lowest incidence of adverse drug reactions (2.32%). Conclusion: Combining oral poly-herbal TCM formulations with WM may provide greater therapeutic benefits in BPH treatment compared to WM alone. JGSQ, GZFL, PLA, and HE emerged as promising treatment options. However, further rigorous empirical studies are essential to substantiate these findings. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=459651, CRD 42023459651.
pharmacology & pharmacy