ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been fully committed to the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China. An increasing number of clinical trials have been registered to evaluate the effects of TCM for COVID-19. The aim of this study was to review the existing TCM clinical trial registrations and identify potentially promising and available TCM therapies, in order to provide a reference for the global management of COVID-19. METHODS: All clinical trials on TCM for COVID-19 registered in registry platforms worldwide were searched. The data of registration temporal trend, design, objective, interventions, and relevant information were reviewed and summarized. RESULTS: 161 TCM trials were identified from three registries (January 26 to May 14 2020,). Of these, 94 (58.4%) were randomized controlled trials and 114 trials (70.8%) assessed therapeutic effects; while the remainder focused on prevention, rehabilitation, and the epidemiology of TCM syndromes. Eight trials (5.0%) had completed their recruitment. TCM interventions with potential for further evaluation in terms of prevention were moxibustion, Huoxiang Zhengqi pill and Jinye Baidu granules. For treatment of COVID-19, Qingfei Paidu decoction, Huashi Baidu decoction, Lianhua Qingwen capsules, Toujie Quwen granules and Xiyanping injection, and Xuebijing injection were to be tested for their therapeutic effects and symptoms relief. For rehabilitation, Tai Chi and Liuzijue were to be tested for improving patients' lung function. CONCLUSION: Some potentially promising TCM interventions have been identified and deserve further evaluation to establish their evidence base, particularly on populations outside of China.
ABSTRACT
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.