ObjectivesTo systematically review the literature pertaining to the prevalence of depression and anxiety in patients with prostate cancer as a function of treatment stage.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Participants4494 patients with prostate cancer from primary research investigations.Primary outcome measureThe prevalence of clinical depression and anxiety in patients with prostate cancer as a function of treatment stage.ResultsWe identified 27 full journal articles that met the inclusion criteria for entry into the meta-analysis resulting in a pooled sample size of 4494 patients. The meta-analysis of prevalence rates identified pretreatment, on-treatment and post-treatment depression prevalences of 17.27% (95% CI 15.06% to 19.72%), 14.70% (95% CI 11.92% to 17.99%) and 18.44% (95% CI 15.18% to 22.22%), respectively. Pretreatment, on-treatment and post-treatment anxiety prevalences were 27.04% (95% CI 24.26% to 30.01%), 15.09% (95% CI 12.15% to 18.60%) and 18.49% (95% CI 13.81% to 24.31%), respectively.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that the prevalence of depression and anxiety in men with prostate cancer, across the treatment spectrum, is relatively high. In light of the growing emphasis placed on cancer survivorship, we consider that further research within this area is warranted to ensure that psychological distress in patients with prostate cancer is not underdiagnosed and undertreated.

IntroductionAntimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a substantial threat to public health. Safe and effective alternatives are required to reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing. Andrographis Paniculata (A. Paniculata, Chuān Xīn Lián) has traditionally been used in Indian and Chinese herbal medicine for cough, cold and influenza, suggesting a role in respiratory tract infections (RTIs). This systematic review aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of A. Paniculata for symptoms of acute RTIs (ARTIs).Materials and methodsEnglish and Chinese databases were searched from their inception to March 2016 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating oral A. Paniculata without language barriers (Protocol ID: CRD42016035679). The primary outcomes were improvement in ARTI symptoms and adverse events (AEs). A random effects model was used to pool the mean differences and risk ratio with 95% CI reported. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool; two reviewers independently screened eligibility and extracted data.ResultsThirty-three RCTs (7175 patients) were included. Most trials evaluated A. Paniculata (as a monotherapy and as a herbal mixture) provided commercially but seldom reported manufacturing or quality control details. A. Paniculata improved cough (n = 596, standardised mean difference SMD: -0.39, 95% confidence interval CI [-0.67, -0.10]) and sore throat (n = 314, SMD: -1.13, 95% CI [-1.37, -0.89]) when compared with placebo. A. Paniculata (alone or plus usual care) has a statistically significant effect in improving overall symptoms of ARTIs when compared to placebo, usual care, and other herbal therapies. Evidence also suggested that A. Paniculata (alone or plus usual care) shortened the duration of cough, sore throat and sick leave/time to resolution when compared versus usual care. No major AEs were reported and minor AEs were mainly gastrointestinal. The methodological quality of included trials was overall poor.ConclusionsA. Paniculata appears beneficial and safe for relieving ARTI symptoms and shortening time to symptom resolution. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously owing to poor study quality and heterogeneity. Well-designed trials evaluating the effectiveness and potential to reduce antibiotic use of A. Paniculata are warranted.

BackgroundQili Qiangxin capsule is a standardized Chinese herbal treatment that is commonly used in China for heart failure (HF) alongside conventional medical care. In 2014, Chinese guidelines for the treatment of chronic HF highlighted Qili Qiangxin capsules as a potentially effective medicine. However, there is at present no high quality review to evaluate the effects and safety of Qili Qiangxin for patients with HF.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis and followed methods described in our registered protocol [PROSPERO registration: CRD42013006106]. We searched 6 electronic databases to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) irrespective of blinding or placebo control of Qili Qiangxin used as an adjuvant treatment for HF.ResultsWe included a total of 129 RCTs published between 2005 and 2015, involving 11,547 patients, aged 18 to 98 years. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference between Qili Qiangxin plus conventional treatment and conventional treatment alone for mortality (RR 0.53, 95 % CI 0.27 to 1.07). However, compared with conventional treatment alone, Qili Qiangxin plus conventional treatment demonstrated a significant reduction in major cardiovascular events (RR 0.46, 95 % CI 0.34 to 0.64) and a significant reduction in re-hospitalization rate due to HF (RR 0.49, 95 % CI 0.38 to 0.64). Qili Qiangxin also showed significant improvement in cardiac function measured by the New York Heart Association scale (RR 1.38, 95 % CI 1.29 to 1.48) and quality of life as measured by Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MD −8.48 scores, 95 % CI −9.56 to −7.39). There were no reports of serious adverse events relating to Qili Qiangxin administration. The majority of included trials were of poor methodological quality.ConclusionsWhen compared with conventional treatment alone, Qili Qiangxin combined with conventional treatment demonstrated a significant effect in reducing cardiovascular events and re-hospitalization rate, though not in mortality. It appeared to significantly improve quality of life in patients with HF and data from RCTs suggested that Qili Qiangxin is likely safe. This data was drawn from low quality trials and the results of this review must therefore be interpreted with caution. Further research is warranted, ideally involving large, prospective, rigorous trials, in order to confirm these findings.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12906-016-1174-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Acupuncture point (acupoint) injection is a common practice in China. Some trials showed that Chinese herbal extracts and/or conventional medication are injected at the Zusanli (ST36) acupoint for the treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). The study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of acupoint injection for DPN at the ST36 by systematically evaluating the evidence published to date.Methods: Six databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ST36 injection for DPN with primary outcome of pain, global symptom improvement, and quality of life. Methodological quality was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias (ROB) tool. Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.3.Results: Fourteen RCTs involving 1,071 participants with DPN were included. All RCTs were assessed as unclear or high ROB. Few RCTs adequately reported methodology-related items and needling details according to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) and Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) statement. Medications injected at ST36 included conventional medications (11 RCTs) and Chinese herbal extracts (3 RCTs). The authors of this study did not perform any meta-analysis due to the heterogeneity of medications used for injections. Two individual RCTs favored ST36 injection in relieving pain compared with intramuscular injection of the same medication. For global symptom measured by Toronto clinical scoring system, one RCT showed that ST36 injection of Fufang Danggui was more effective than intramuscular injection of vitamin B 12 , two RCTs demonstrated that ST36 injection of mecobalamin or Danhong with cointervention was superior, while one RCT showed no significant differences between ST36 injection and intramuscular injection of mecobalamin. For improving nerve conduction velocity (NCV), three of four individual RCTs showed that ST36 injection was better than intramuscular or intravenous injection of the same medication, two RCTs favored ST36 injection with cointervention, and one RCT favored ST36 injection without cointervention. Four RCTs reported monitoring adverse events, all of which showed no significant difference between groups.Conclusions: Limited evidence suggests that ST36 injection appears to be safe, and potentially effective in reducing pain score and improving NCV compared with intramuscular injection of the same medication. However, poor methodological and reporting quality reduced confidence in the findings. Rigorously designed and well-reported RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of ST36 injection for DPN are warranted.

BackgroundSummer acupoint herbal patching (SAHP) has been widely used in China for thousands of years. This bibliometric analysis aims to provide a comprehensive review of the characteristics of clinical studies on SAHP for any condition.MethodsWe included clinical studies such as randomized clinical trials (RCTs), controlled clinical studies (CCTs), case series (CSs), case reports (CRs), and cross-sectional studies on SAHP for any condition. Six databases were searched from date of inception to March 2015. Bibliometric information and study details such as study type, characteristics of participants, details of the intervention and comparison, and outcome were extracted and analyzed.ResultsA total of 937 clinical studies were identified and which were published between 1977 and 2015. This included 404 RCTs, 52 CCTs, 458 CSs, 19 CRs and 4 cross-sectional studies and involved 232,138 participants aged 2 to 90 years from two countries. Almost all studies were from China (936, 99.89 %). The five conditions most commonly treated by SAHP were asthma (401, 42.80 %), chronic bronchitis (146, 15.58 %), allergic rhinitis (117, 12.49 %), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (73, 7.79 %), and recurrent respiratory tract infection (42, 4.48 %). Among 502 controlled studies, the majority compared SAHP alone with different controls (16 categories, 275 comparisons). The most commonly used controls were western medicine, placebo, traditional Chinese medicine, no treatment and non-pharmaceutical traditional Chinese therapies. Composite outcome measures were the most frequently reported outcome (512, 69.19 %).ConclusionA substantial amount of research on SAHP has been published in China and which predominantly focuses on respiratory conditions. The findings from this study can be used to inform further research by highlighting areas of greatest impact for SAHP.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12906-015-0905-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.