[Expert consensus statement on Xiyanping Injection for respiratory system infectious diseases in clinical practice(adults)]

Clinical Progress on Management of Pneumonia Due to COVID-19 With Chinese Traditional Patent Medicines

Background: The outbreak of new coronavirus has tremendously threatened the public health system worldwide, including China. Chinese patent medicines (CPMs) have greatly contributed to the prevention and treatment of this viral infection, as well as the recovery of patients with COVID-19 infection. Therefore, numerous experts and guidelines recommend to take CPMs to treat pneumonia due to COVID-19.

Aim of the Study: The present study reviewed CPMs recommended by the < Guidelines for diagnosis and management of COVID-19 (8^th edition)> regarding evidence of their efficacy from clinical studies and the underlying mechanisms, which will lay the foundation for clinical use of these CPMs for COVID-19.

Methods: The composition, efficacy, indications, history of use, and relevant clinical research on 14 recommended CPMs, including Huoxiangzhengqi capsules (pills, liquid, oral solution), Jinhuaqinggan granules, Lianhuaqingwen capsules (granules), Shufengjiedu capsules, Xiyanping injections, Xuebijing injections, Reduning injections, Tanreqing injections, Xingnaojing injections, Shenfu injections, Shengmai injections, Angongniuhuang pills, Suhexiang pills, were searched in both Chinese and English databases based on differences in stages of the disease and manifestations of such patients. Advantages of these CPMs over conventional treatments and their underlying mechanisms were explored by analyzing results from published articles and undergoing clinical trials.

Results: Findings from clinical studies and Chinese experience in using these CPMs showed that CPMs, when used in combination with conventional treatments, were effective in managing COVID-19 with few side effects.

Conclusion: CPMs have excellent efficacy in managing COVID-19 with a great potential for clinical use.

Characteristics of registered studies for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization characterized the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic on March 11th. Many clinical trials on COVID-19 have been registered, and we aim to review the study characteristics and provide guidance for future trials to avoid duplicated effort.

METHODS

Studies on COVID-19 registered before March 3rd, 2020 on eight registry platforms worldwide were searched and the data of design, participants, interventions, and outcomes were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

Three hundred and ninety-three studies were identified and 380 (96.7%) were from mainland China, while 3 in Japan, 3 in France, 2 in the US, and 3 were international collaborative studies. Two hundred and sixty-six (67.7%) aimed at therapeutic effect, others were for prevention, diagnosis, prognosis, etc. Two hundred and two studies (51.4%) were randomized controlled trials. Two third of therapeutic studies tested Western medicines including antiviral drugs (17.7%), stem cell and cord blood therapy (10.2%), chloroquine and derivatives (8.3%), 16 (6.0%) on Chinese medicines, and 73 (27.4%) on integrated therapy of Western and Chinese medicines. Thirty-one studies among 266 therapeutic studies (11.7%) used mortality as primary outcome, while the most designed secondary outcomes were symptoms and signs (47.0%). Half of the studies (45.5%) had not started recruiting till March 3rd.

CONCLUSION

Inappropriate outcome setting, delayed recruitment and insufficient numbers of new cases in China implied many studies may fail to complete. Strategies and protocols of the studies with robust and rapid data sharing are warranted for emergency public health events, helping the timely evidence-based decision-making.