Chinese herbal medicine (“3 medicines and 3 formulations”) for COVID‐19: rapid systematic review and meta‐analysis

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the evidence behind claims that Chinese Herbal Medicine, specifically “three medicines and three formulations” (3M3F, comprising Jinhua Qinggan, Lianhua Qingwen, Xuebijing, Qingfei Paidu, Huashi Baidu, and Xuanfei Baidu), is an effective treatment for COVID‐19. METHODS: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE and CNKI databases, preprint servers, clinical trial registries and supplementary sources for Chinese‐ or English‐language randomized trials or non‐randomized studies with comparator groups, which tested the constituents of 3M3F in the treatment of COVID‐19 up to September 2020. Primary outcome was change in disease severity. Secondary outcomes included various symptoms. Meta‐analysis (using generic inverse variance random effects model) was performed when there were two or more studies reporting on the same symptom. RESULTS: Of 607 articles identified, 13 primary studies (6 RCTs and 7 retrospective non‐randomized comparative studies) with 1467 participants met our final inclusion criteria. Studies were small and had significant methodological limitations, most notably potential bias in assessment of outcomes. No study convincingly demonstrated a statistically significant impact on change in disease severity. Eight studies reported sufficiently similar secondary outcomes to be included in a meta‐analysis. Some statistically significant impacts on symptoms, chest CT manifestations, laboratory variables and length of stay were demonstrated, but such findings were sparse and many remain unreplicated. CONCLUSIONS: These findings neither support nor refute the claim that 3M3F alters the severity of COVID‐19 or alleviates symptoms. More rigorous studies are required to properly ascertain the potential role of Chinese Herbal Medicine in COVID‐19.