Evidence Hub

Medicine for chronic atrophic gastritis: a systematic review, meta- and network pharmacology analysis

Weng J, Wu XF, Shao P, Liu XP, Wang CX

Annals of medicine, 2023

1,140 participants

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness and reliability of adding traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in the clinical intervention and explore mechanisms of action for chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG) through meta- and network pharmacology analysis (NPAs).

METHODS: A predefined search strategy was used to retrieve literature from PubMed, Embase database, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (CBM), Wan Fang Data and China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP). After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 12 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included for meta-analysis to provide clinical evidence of the intervention effects. A network meta-analysis using Bayesian networks was conducted to observe the relative effects of different intervention measures and possible ranking of effects. The composition of the TCM formulation in the experimental group was analysed, and association rule mining was performed to identify hub herbal medicines. Target genes for CAG were searched in GeneCards, Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man, PharmGKB, Therapeutic Target Database and DrugBank. A regulatory network was constructed to connect the target genes with active ingredients of the hub herbal medicines. Enrichment analyses were performed using the Gene Ontology (GO) and the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) to examine the central targets from a comprehensive…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in computer models (in silico), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 1,140 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free