» Articles » PMID: 36034785

Kanglaite (Coix Seed Extract) As Adjunctive Therapy in Cancer: Evidence Mapping Overview Based on Systematic Reviews With Meta-Analyses

Overview
Journal Front Pharmacol
Date 2022 Aug 29
PMID 36034785
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Several quantitative systematic reviews of Kanglaite (KLT), an herb preparation used to treat cancer and malignant pleural effusion, have been published in recent years. However, the clinical evidence reported in these studies has not been pursued further and the methodological quality of these meta-analyses remains unknown. Therefore, an overview was designed to map the evidence landscape based on the published meta-analyses on KLT in cancer treatment. Two bibliographic databases (PubMed and Embase) were searched from inception to 25 November 2021. Two independent reviewers were involved in study selection, data abstraction, and methodological quality assessment using AMSTAR 2. The principal features of publications and the clinical outcomes of efficacy and safety were synthesized narratively, and results of methodological quality were reported as frequencies and percentages with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. The evidence map was used to visualize the overall quality. Excel 2016 and Stata 17/SE were used for data analysis. Thirteen meta-analyses published in English were included for in-depth analysis. Among them, the year of publication ranged from 2008 to 2021, and the number of included patients ranged from 488 to 2,964. Regarding the cancer type, seven articles focused on non-small cell lung cancer, two on malignant pleural effusion, and four reviews on digestive system malignancies, such as hepatocellular carcinoma and pancreatic cancer. Almost all included meta-analyses reported that KLT as adjunctive therapy could improve various efficacy outcomes (such as disease response rates, quality of life, immune indicators) and reduce the rate of occurrence of adverse reactions, such as nausea and vomiting, leukopenia, and anemia. In terms of their methodological quality, three meta-analyses were of low quality, whereas 10 studies were critically low in quality. The methodological flaws main involved items 2 ("predesigned protocol and registration informatio''), 3 ("rationale of study design for inclusion"), 4 ("comprehensive search strategy''), 5 ("literature selection in duplicate''), 7 ("list of excluded studies with reasons''), 8 ("adequate information on included studies''), 10 ("funding support for included primary studies''), and 12 ("evaluation of the potential impact of risk of bias'') based on the AMSTAR 2 tool. Current evidence reveals that KLT is effective and safe as an adjunctive treatment for non-small cell lung cancer, malignant pleural effusion, and digestive system malignancies (such as hepatocellular carcinoma). However, the results assessed in this overview should be further verified using well-designed and clearly reported clinical trials and meta-analyses of KLT.

Citing Articles

Traditional Chinese medicine for the treatment of cancers of hepatobiliary system: from clinical evidence to drug discovery.

Wu J, Tang G, Cheng C, Yeerken R, Chan Y, Fu Z Mol Cancer. 2024; 23(1):218.

PMID: 39354529 PMC: 11443773. DOI: 10.1186/s12943-024-02136-2.


New perspectives on chemokines in hepatocellular carcinoma therapy: a critical pathway for natural products regulation of the tumor microenvironment.

Ruishi X, Linyi X, Yunfan B, Wenbo Y, Xiaoying Z, Xiaoxue F Front Immunol. 2024; 15:1456405.

PMID: 39206194 PMC: 11349538. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1456405.


Anti-cancer effects of Coix seed extract through KCTD9-mediated ubiquitination of TOP2A in lung adenocarcinoma.

Jiang J, Li X, Zhang C, Wang J, Li J Cell Div. 2024; 19(1):6.

PMID: 38374109 PMC: 10877835. DOI: 10.1186/s13008-024-00112-2.


Anti-tumor effect of coix seed based on the theory of medicinal and food homology.

Meng F, Yuan L, Lu D, Yang Y, Xu D, Che M World J Clin Oncol. 2024; 14(12):593-605.

PMID: 38179404 PMC: 10762529. DOI: 10.5306/wjco.v14.i12.593.


and health outcomes: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Li Z, Wang Y, Xu Q, Ma J, Li X, Yan J Front Nutr. 2023; 10:1107750.

PMID: 37057067 PMC: 10086143. DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2023.1107750.

References
1.
Wang Z, Nayfeh T, Tetzlaff J, OBlenis P, Murad M . Error rates of human reviewers during abstract screening in systematic reviews. PLoS One. 2020; 15(1):e0227742. PMC: 6959565. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227742. View

2.
Chapelle C, Ollier E, Girard P, Frere C, Mismetti P, Cucherat M . An epidemic of redundant meta-analyses. J Thromb Haemost. 2021; 19(5):1299-1306. DOI: 10.1111/jth.15280. View

3.
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel R, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A . Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021; 71(3):209-249. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21660. View

4.
Gates M, Gates A, Guitard S, Pollock M, Hartling L . Guidance for overviews of reviews continues to accumulate, but important challenges remain: a scoping review. Syst Rev. 2020; 9(1):254. PMC: 7643411. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-020-01509-0. View

5.
Pieper D, Lorenz R, Rombey T, Jacobs A, Rissling O, Freitag S . Authors should clearly report how they derived the overall rating when applying AMSTAR 2-a cross-sectional study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020; 129:97-103. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.09.046. View