With the aging of the global population, an increasing number of elderly are diagnosed with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Although systematic chemotherapy has been one of the primary treatments for advanced non-small cell lung cancer worldwide, the elderly cannot always tolerate standard platinum-based doublet chemotherapy, thus resulting in treatment failure. To reduce toxicity, single-agent chemotherapy is often used to treat the elderly with non-small cell lung cancer; however, this may increase the risk of treatment failure due to an inadequate dose. It has been shown that compound kushen injection in combination with chemotherapy can enhance the efficacy and reduce the toxicity. The aim of this trial is to assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of compound kushen injection in combination with single-agent chemotherapy versus platinum-based doublet chemotherapy in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. This multicenter study will be an open-label, randomized controlled trial. Three hundred seventy elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer will be randomly divided into experimental (n = 185) and control groups (n = 185) to receive compound kushen injection in combination with single-agent chemotherapy or standard platinum-based doublet chemotherapy for two cycles. After two cycles, the disease control rate, objective response rate, clinical symptoms, quality of life, Karnofsky Performance Status, and side effects will be assessed. Follow-up evaluations will be performed every 8 weeks to evaluate the progression-free and overall survival. Before the trial was designed, compound kushen injection was shown to be effective for lung cancer through basic experiments and clinical trials. This study will determine whether or not the efficacy of compound kushen injection in combination with single-agent chemotherapy is comparable to that of platinum-based doublet chemotherapy, and whether or not the toxicity of compound kushen injection in combination with single-agent chemotherapy is lower than that of platinum-based doublet chemotherapy. ChiCTR-IPR-14005484 (16 November 2014).

Cancer patients often experience decreased quality of life during chemotherapy. This study aimed to determine the preliminary efficacy and safety of Reishi & Privet Formula (RPF) for maintaining quality of life among patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) undergoing chemotherapy. We conducted a phase II randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial in China. Adults with NSCLC scheduled to receive chemotherapy were randomly assigned (3:1 ratio) to receive oral RPF (3.36 g/day) or placebo daily for 6 weeks. The main outcome was the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Lung (FACT-L). We evaluated RPF’s safety profile using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and assessed changes in outcome measures from baseline to weeks 3 and 6 using a linear mixed effects model. We enrolled 82 participants across 8 cancer centers in China. The median age was 59 years, 56 (68%) had advanced cancer. Compared with the placebo group, the RPF group had nonstatistically significant higher quality of life as measured by the FACT-L total score (P = .086) over 2 cycles of chemotherapy. The RPF group was associated with a nonsignificant better general health (P = .050) and emotional well-being (P = .090) than the placebo group. Adverse events rates did not differ between groups. This study demonstrated preliminary safety and suggests a promising trend in RPF’s effect on maintaining quality of life and emotional well-being among NSCLC patients undergoing chemotherapy. Future adequately powered randomized-controlled trials are needed to verify the efficacy and safety of RPF in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to spread globally. Due to the higher risk of mortality, the treatment of severe or critical patients is a top priority. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) treatment has played an extremely important role in the fight against COVID-19 in China; a timely evidence summary on TCM in managing COVID-19 is crucial to update the knowledge of healthcare for better clinical management of COVID-19. This study aimed to assess the effects and safety of TCM treatments for severe/critical COVID-19 patients by systematically collecting and synthesizing evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (e.g., cohort).Methods: We searched nine databases up to 19th March 2022 and the reference lists of relevant publications. Pairs of reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data of interest, and assessed risk of bias. We performed qualitative systematic analysis with visual presentation of results and compared the direction and distribution of effect estimates for each patient’s important outcome. We performed sensitivity analyses to observe the robustness of results by restricting analysis to studies with low risk of bias.Results: The search yielded 217,761 records, and 21 studies (6 RCTs and 15 observational studies) proved eligible. A total of 21 studies enrolled 12,981 severe/critical COVID-19 patients with a mean age of 57.21 years and a mean proportion of men of 47.91%. Compared with usual supportive treatments, the effect estimates of TCM treatments were consistent in direction, illustrating that TCM treatments could reduce the risk of mortality, rate of conversion to critical cases, and mechanical ventilation, and showed significant advantages in shortening the length of hospital stay, time to viral clearance, and symptom resolution. The results were similar when we restricted analyses to low-risk-bias studies. No serious adverse events were reported with TCM treatments, and no significant differences were observed between groups.Conclusion: Encouraging evidence suggests that TCM presents substantial advantages in treating severe/critical COVID-19 patients. TCM has a safety profile that is comparable to that of conventional treatment alone. TCMs have played an important role in China’s prevention and treatment of COVID-19, which sets an example of using traditional medicine in preventing and treating COVID-19 worldwide.

Impairment of exercise capacity remains a common adverse effect of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) survivors after surgery. Previous research has suggested that Tai Chi Chuan (TCC) offers an exercise capacity benefit in several types of cancers. This is a randomized trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of TCC in postoperative NSCLC patients over an observation period of 3 months and a 9-month follow-up. Using a prospective, one center and randomized design, 120 subjects with histologically confirmed stage I–IIIA NSCLC following complete surgical resection will potentially be eligible for this trial. Following baseline assessments, eligible participants will be randomly assigned to one of two conditions: (1) TCC training, or (2) placebo control. The training sessions for both groups will last 60 min and take place three times a week for 3 months. The sessions will be supervised with target intensity of 60–80% of work capacity, dyspnea, and heart rate management. The primary study endpoint is peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak), and the secondary endpoints include: 6-min walk distance (6MWD), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), lung function, immunity function, and the state of depression and anxiety. All endpoints will be assessed at the baseline and postintervention (3 months). A follow-up period of 9 months will be included. The main time points for the evaluation of clinical efficacy and safety will be months 3, 6, 9, and 12 after enrollment. This study will assess the effect of group TCC in postsurgery NSCLC survivors on VO2peak, lung function, and other aspects. The results of this study will eventually provide clinical proof of the application of TCC as one kind of exercise training for patients across the entire NSCLC continuum, as well as information on the safety and feasibility of exercise. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR-IOR-15006548 . Registered on 12 June 2015.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still a pandemic globally, about 80% of patients infected with COVID-19 were mild and moderate. Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) has played a positive role in the treatment of COVID-19, with a certain number of primary studies focused on CHM in managing COVID-19 published. This study aims to systematically review the currently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (OBs), and summarize the effectiveness and safety of CHM in the treatment of mild/moderate COVID-19 patients.Methods: We searched 9 databases up to 19 March 2022. Pairs of reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. For overall effect, we calculated the absolute risk difference (ARD) of weighted averages of different estimates, and certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) system.Results: We included 35 RCTs and 24 OBs enrolling 16,580 mild/moderate patients. The certainty of evidence was very low to low. Compared with usual supportive treatments, most effect estimates of CHM treatments were consistent in direction. CHMs presented significant benefits in reducing rate of conversion to severe cases (ARD = 99 less per 1000 patients in RCTs and 131 less per 1000 patients in OBs, baseline risk: 16.52%) and mortality (ARD = 3 less per 1000 patients in RCTs and OBs, baseline risk: 0.40%); shortening time to symptom resolution (3.35 days in RCTs and 2.94 days in OBs), length of hospital stay (2.36 days in RCTs and 2.12 days in OBs) and time to viral clearance (2.64 days in RCTs and 4.46 days in OBs); increasing rate of nucleic acid conversion (ARD = 73 more per 1000 patients in OBs, baseline risk: 16.30%). No serious adverse reactions were found and the differences between CHM and usual supportive care were insignificant.Conclusion: Encouraging evidence showed that CHMs were beneficial in treating mild or moderate patients. CHMs have been proved to possess a safety profile that is comparable to that of usual supportive treatment alone. More rigorously designed clinical trials and mechanism studies are still warranted to further confirm the present findings.

Aim: Breast cancer imposes a serious disease and economic burden on patients. This guideline aims to develop a living evidence‐based clinical practice recommendations to guide the use of integrative therapies for the improvement of patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) in breast cancer survivors.Methods: We searched systematic reviews and meta‐analyses or conducted de nova systematic reviews and meta‐analyses to support the recommendations. The grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence and the strength of recommendations.Results: The guideline panel issued 17 recommendations: for alleviating anxiety, strong recommendations in favor of muscle relaxation training, yoga, acceptance and commitment therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, psychological education, and Tai Chi in general breast cancer survivors; for alleviating depression, strong recommendations in favor of mindfulness therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, group psychotherapy, muscle relaxation training, acceptanceand commitment therapy in general breast cancer survivors, and exercise intervention for patients received radiotherapy; for sleep quality, conditional recommendations for all therapies; for pain, strong recommendations in favor of exercise intervention for postoperative breast cancer survivors; for alleviating fatigue, strong recommendations in favor of mindfulness therapy and group psychotherapy in general breast cancer survivors; for improving the quality of life, strong recommendations in favor of mindfulness therapy in general breast cancer survivors, Baduanjin and exercise intervention for patients undergoing anticancer treatment.Conclusion: This proposed guideline provides recommendations for improving the PROs of breast cancer survivors. We hope these recommendations can help support practicing physicians and other healthcare providers for breast cancer survivors.