Evidence Hub

Traditional Chinese medicine use is associated with lower risk of pneumonia in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a population-based retrospective cohort study

Weijie Wang, Yu-Hsun Wang, Kepeng Yang, X. Ye, Xin-Chang Wang, J. Wei

Frontiers in Pharmacology, 2023

9,714 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate the association between traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) therapy and the risk of pneumonia in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods: This population-based control study analyzed the data retrieved from the National Health Insurance Research database in Taiwan. From a cohort of 2 million records of the 2000–2018 period, 9,714 newly diagnosed patients with SLE were initially included. 532 patients with pneumonia and 532 patients without pneumonia were matched 1:1 based on age, sex, and year of SLE diagnosis using propensity score matching. The use of TCM therapy was considered from the SLE diagnosis date to the index date and the cumulative days of TCM therapy were used to calculate the dose effect. Conditional logistic regression was used to investigate the risk of pneumonia infection. Furthermore, to explore the severity of pneumonia in SLE, sensitivity analyses were performed after stratification using the parameters of emergency room visit, admission time, and antibiotic use. Results: TCM therapy for >60 days could significantly reduce the risk of pneumonia in patients with SLE (95% CI = 0.46–0.91; p = 0.012). Stratified analysis showed that TCM use also reduced the risk of pneumonia in younger and female patients with SLE by 34% and 35%, respectively. TCM for >60 days significantly reduced the risk of pneumonia in the follow-up periods of >2, >3, >7, and >8 years. In addition, the exposure of TCM for >60 days reduced the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 9,714 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