MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130058826 · doi:10.1039/d0fo03341c

Efficacy of ginseng and its ingredients as adjuvants to chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer

2021· review· en· W3130058826 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFood & Function · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGinseng Biological Effects and Applications
Canadian institutionsThe Metabolomics Innovation Centre
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsGinsengChemotherapyMedicineAdverse effectLung cancerOncologyLungCancerPharmacologyTraditional medicineInternal medicineAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chemotherapy is applied to treat non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but often limited due to its unstable therapeutic effects and adverse reactions (ADRs). Ginseng and its main ingredients (ginsenosides and polysaccharides) have been clinically used as adjuvants to chemotherapy. However, their efficacies were based on individual trials with relatively small sample sizes, and it is difficult to draw a valid conclusion. In this study, eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched in six international and Chinese databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese VIP Information and Wanfang). The outcomes of the objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), ADRs, quality of life (QOL), survival rates and immunity were extracted using standard data extraction forms. The efficacies of ginseng and its ingredients as adjuvants to chemotherapy in NSCLC were investigated and compared by meta-analysis and subgroup meta-analysis, respectively. A total of 28 RCTs including 2503 subjects were enrolled, and most of the eligible studies were of low-to-moderate quality. For the evaluation of ginseng and its ingredients as adjuvants to chemotherapy, the risk ratio (RR) or standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of the ORR, DCR, leucopenia, thrombocytopenia, myelosuppression, hepatotoxicity, nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, CD4+/CD8+ and one- and two-year survival rates, and QOL were 1.35 (1.21,1.50), 1.20 (1.14,1.28), 0.59 (0.50, 0.70), 0.53 (0.37, 0.76), 0.30 (0.17, 0.53), 0.67 (0.52, 0.87), 0.67 (0.53, 0.86), 0.42 (0.19, 0.96), 1.39 (0.63, 2.16), 1.35 (1.13, 1.60), 3.21 (1.51, 6.81) and 1.31 (1.22, 1.41) with significant differences. Subgroup analysis showed that ginseng enhanced nausea and vomiting and QOL, ginsenosides increased ORR, DCR, QOL, leucopenia, thrombocytopenia, myelosuppression, hepatotoxicity, diarrhea, CD4+/CD8+, and one- and two-year survival rates, while polysaccharides improved ORR, DCR, leucopenia, thrombocytopenia, myelosuppression, hepatotoxicity and nausea and vomiting during chemotherapy. In conclusion, ginseng and its ingredients facilitated the therapeutic effects of chemotherapy on NSCLC patients. Ginseng had beneficial effects on alleviating ADRs and enhancing QOL, ginsenosides demonstrated beneficial effects on enhancing therapeutic effects, reducing ADRs, improving immunity, prolonging survival rates and promoting QOL, while polysaccharides showed beneficial effects on promoting therapeutic effects and reducing ADRs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.764

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it