L-arginine effect on inflammatory mediators: A systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials

Author(s):  
Seyed Reza Mirhafez ◽  
Mitra Hariri

Abstract. L-arginine is an important factor in several physiological and biochemical processes. Recently, scientists studied L-arginine effect on inflammatory mediators such as C-reactive protein (CRP), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and interleukin-6 (IL-6). We conducted a systematic review on randomized controlled trials assessing L-arginine effect on inflammatory mediators. We searched data bases including Google scholar, ISI web of science, SCOPUS, and PubMed/Medline up to April 2019. Randomized clinical trials assessing the effect of L-arginine on inflammatory mediators in human adults were included. Our search retrieved eleven articles with 387 participants. Five articles were on patients with cancer and 6 articles were on adults without cancer. L-arginine was applied in enteral form in 5 articles and in oral form in 6 articles. Eight articles were on both genders, two articles were on women, and one article was on men. L-arginine could not reduce inflammatory mediators among patients with and without cancer except one article which indicated that taking L-arginine for 6 months decreased IL-6 among cardiopathic nondiabetic patients. Our results indicated that L-arginine might not be able to reduce selected inflammatory mediators, but for making a firm decision more studies are needed to be conducted with longer intervention duration, separately on male and female and with different doses of L-arginine.

Author(s):  
Zeinab Yazdanpanah ◽  
Mandana Amiri ◽  
Azadeh Nadjarzadeh ◽  
Hadis Hooshmandi ◽  
Maryam Azadi-Yazdi

Introduction: Hypertension is a chronic condition that might lead to renal and cardiovascular diseases. The previous trials examining the effect of cinnamon supplementation on blood pressure have led to conflicting results. The present systematic review aimed to summarize the effect of cinnamon supplementation on blood pressure using a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled clinical trials. Methods: To identify the eligible articles, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, ISI Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched from inception until September 2019 for relevant articles. The risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane collaboration tool. A Random-effects model was applied to calculate the summary effects. Results: Totally, 11 trials with 686 participants were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The dose of cinnamon supplement consumption varied from 500 to 10000 mg/d. The meta-analysis revealed that cinnamon supplementation significantly decreases systolic blood pressure (SBP) [WMD (weighted mean difference)= -5.72 mmHg, 95% confidence interval (CI): -8.63 to -2.80; P<0.001, I2= 81.1)] and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (WMD= -4.06 mmHg, 95% CI: -6.68 to -1.44; P= 0.002, I2 = 88.6). Subgroup analysis suggested no significant reduction of DBP in subjects with diabetes (WMD= -2.015 mmHg, 95% CI: -4.55 to 0.52; P= 0.12, I2 = 72.3) and prediabetes or metabolic syndrome (WMD= -4.8 mmHg, 95% CI: -10.06 to 0.44; P= 0.073, I2= 92.5). Conclusions: Cinnamon supplementation could be beneficial in lowering SBP and DBP in adults. Further studies with different doses are recommended to confirm the present findings.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 443-455
Author(s):  
Mahmoud Hashim ◽  
Talitha Vincken ◽  
Florint Kroi ◽  
Samron Gebregergish ◽  
Mike Spencer ◽  
...  

Aim: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify and characterize noninferiority margins for relevant end points in oncology clinical trials. Materials & methods: Randomized, controlled, noninferiority trials of patients with cancer were identified in PubMed and Embase. Results: Of 2284 publications identified, 285 oncology noninferiority clinical trials were analyzed. The median noninferiority margin was a hazard ratio of 1.29 (mean: 1.32; range: 1.05–2.05) for studies that reported time-to-event end points (n = 192). The median noninferiority margin was 13.0% (mean: 12.7%; range: 5.0–20.0%) for studies that reported response end points as absolute rate differences (n = 31). Conclusion: Although there was consistency in the noninferiority margins’ scale, variability was evident in noninferiority margins across trials. Increased transparency may improve consistency in noninferiority margin application in oncology clinical trials.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document