Efficacy and safety of berberine plus 5-ASA for ulcerative colitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

source extracted confidence: high 2026-04-09
#humans #anti-inflammatory-agents-non-steroidal #berberine #colitis-ulcerative #drug-therapy-combination

Efficacy and safety of berberine plus 5-ASA for ulcerative colitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Li et al., 2024 | PLoS One | Meta Analysis

Citation

Li Jilei, Zhang Chenchen, ... Yang Lili. Efficacy and safety of berberine plus 5-ASA for ulcerative colitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2024;19(9):e0309144. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0309144

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of berberine(BBR) plus 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) for treating ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted in electronic databases, including Medline/PubMed, Sinomed, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP, through January 2024 to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that administered BBR conjunction in standard therapy(5-ASA) for to support the treatment of UC. The data were synthesized using a meta-analysis approach with RevMan 5.4.1. The primary endpoint was the clinical efficacy rate. In contrast, the secondary endpoints included the Baron score, disease activity index (DAI) score, symptom relief latency, inflammatory markers, immunological indicators, and adverse events. RESULTS: In this analysis, 10 RCTs comprising 952 patients with UC were examined. BBR considerably improved the clinical efficacy rate (RR = 1.22, 95% CI [1.15, 1.30], P < 0.00001), attenuated the Baron score (SMD = -1.72, 95% CI [-2.30, -1.13], P < 0.00001) and reduced the DAI score (SMD = -2.93, 95% CI [-4.42, -1.43], P < 0.00001). Additionally, it ameliorated clinical symptoms (SMD = -2.74, 95% CI [-3.45, 2.02], P < 0.00001), diminished inflammatory responses (SMD = -1.59, 95% CI [-2.14, 1.04], P < 0.00001), and modulated immune reactions (SMD = 1.06,95% CI [0.24,1.87], P <0.00001). Nonetheless, the impact of BBR on reducing adverse reactions was not statistically significant (RR = 0.75, 95% CI [0.42, 1.33], P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: BBR demonstrates substantial efficacy in treating UC without causing severe adverse reactions and may serve as a viable complementary therapy. However, its clinical application warrants confirmation by additional high-quality, low-bias RCTs.

Key Findings

In this analysis, 10 RCTs comprising 952 patients with UC were examined. BBR considerably improved the clinical efficacy rate (RR = 1.22, 95% CI [1.15, 1.30], P < 0.00001), attenuated the Baron score (SMD = -1.72, 95% CI [-2.30, -1.13], P < 0.00001) and reduced the DAI score (SMD = -2.93, 95% CI [-4.42, -1.43], P < 0.00001). Additionally, it ameliorated clinical symptoms (SMD = -2.74, 95% CI [-3.45, 2.02], P < 0.00001), diminished inflammatory responses (SMD = -1.59, 95% CI [-2.14, 1.04], P < 0.

Outcomes Measured

  • inflammatory markers

Population

Field Value
Population uc were examined
Sample Size 952
Age Range See abstract
Condition See abstract

MeSH Terms

  • Humans
  • Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal
  • Berberine
  • Colitis, Ulcerative
  • Drug Therapy, Combination
  • Mesalamine
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
  • Treatment Outcome

Evidence Classification

  • Level: Meta Analysis
  • Publication Types: Journal Article, Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis
  • Vertical: berberine

Provenance

Source extracted via PubMed E-utilities API on 2026-04-09