Antitumor Effects of Evodiamine in Mice Model Experiments: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background Evodiamine (EVO), an alkaloid extracted from the traditional Chinese medicine Euodia rutaecarpa , plays an important role in the treatment of cancer. This study was performed to clarify the effects of evodiamine in mice tumor model studies. Methods Electronic databases and search engines involved China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database (CNKI), Wanfang Database, Chinese Scientific Journal Database (CSJD-VIP), China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases, which were searched for literature related to the antitumor effects of evodiamine in animal tumor models (all until 1 October 2021). The evodiamine effects on the tumor volume and tumor weight were compared between the treatment and control groups using the standardized mean difference (SMD). Results Evodiamine significantly inhibited tumor growth in mice, as was assessed with tumor volume [13 studies, n=267; 138 for EVO and 129 for control; standard mean difference (SMD)= -5.99; 95% (CI): -8.89 to -3.10; I 2 = 97.69%, p ≤ 0.00], tumor weight [6 studies, n=89; 49 for EVO and 40 for control; standard mean difference (SMD)= -3.51; 95% (CI): -5.13 to -3.90; I 2 = 83.02%, p ≤ 0.00]. Conclusion EVO significantly suppresses tumor growth in mice models, which would be beneficial for clinical transformation. However, due to the small number of studies included in this meta-analysis, the experimental design and experimental method limitations should be considered when interpreting the results. Significant clinical and animal studies are still required to evaluate whether EVO can be used in the adjuvant treatment of clinical tumor patients.

Abstract licence: CC BY

1. 7.

   Pharmacological Actions of Multi-Target-Directed Evodiamine · 2013

2. 8.

   SYRCLE’s risk of bias tool for animal studies · 2014

3. 9.

   Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis of Preclinical Studies: Why Perform Them and How to Appraise Them Critically · 2014

4. 28.

   The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews · 2021

27 more references, whose wording the paper’s licence keeps private.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.