Evidence Hub

Exploring the benefits and prescribing informations of combining East Asian herbal medicine with conventional medicine in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review and multifaceted analysis of 415 randomized controlled trials

Jo HG, Seo J, Baek E, Lee D

Pharmacological research, 2025

37,839 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Notwithstanding progress in conventional medicine (CM), the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) continues to be problematic due to factors such as limited patient response to treatment and restricted medication access. This study aimed to evaluate the extent to which East Asian herbal medicine with CM combination therapy (EACM) provides additional benefits in effectiveness and safety.

METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search across 11 databases in English, Chinese, Korean, and Japanese for randomized controlled trials. The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, using the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 Response Criteria and the incidence of adverse events (AEI) as primary outcomes. This meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. The quality of each study was assessed according to the RoB 2. Of the 1036 full-text articles screened, 415 were included in the review.

RESULTS: This review included data from 37,839 participants. EACM was associated with higher ACR responses: ACR 20 (RR: 1.2332; 95 % CI: 1.1852-1.2831, p < 0.0001), ACR 50 (RR: 1.3782; 95 % CI: 1.2936-1.4684, p < 0.0001), and ACR 70 (RR: 1.7084; 95 % CI: 1.5555-1.8762, p < 0.0001), as well as a favorable AEI (OR: 0.3977; 95 % CI: 0.3476-0.4551, p < 0.0001), indicating both better efficacy and safety compared to CM alone. These patterns were consistent across eight secondary outcomes measuring pain,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 37,839 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