The rational dose for MaXingShiGan decoction is crucial for its clinical effectiveness in treating bronchial pneumonia: three randomized, double-blind, dose-parallel controlled clinical studies
Authors: An Xuedong , Shi Changren , Han Yaowei , Li Xinmin , Dong Lijing , Li Yan , Chen Hui , Wang Yushui , Li Jinsong , Liu Geli , Lian Fengmei , Ma Rong , Tong Xiaolin 
Published: November 2023

Objective: Evaluate the impact of adjusting the overall dose, Gypsum Fibrosum [Mineral; Gypsum] (ShiGao, SG) dose, and Prunus armeniaca L. [Rosaceae; Semen Armeniacae Amarum] (KuXingRen, KXR) dose on the efficacy of MaXingShiGan Decoction (MXSG) in treating children with bronchial pneumonia (Wind-heat Blocking the Lung), in order to provide strategy supported by high-quality evidence for the selection of rational clinical doses of MXSG.Methods: Based on the basic dose of MXSG, we conducted three randomized, double-blind, dose parallel controlled, multicenter clinical trials, involving adjustments to the overall dose, SG dose, and KXR dose, and included 120 children with bronchial pneumonia (Wind-heat Blocking the Lung) respectively. And the patients were divided into low, medium, and high dose groups in a 1:1:1 ratio, with 40 cases in each group. The intervention period lasted for 10 days. The primary outcome was the clinical cured rate, while the secondary outcomes included the effectiveness in alleviating major symptoms of bronchial pneumonia (including fever, cough, dyspnea, and phlegm congestion). And the occurrence of adverse events was recorded.Results: We first recorded and analyzed the baseline characteristics of the three studies, including age, gender, height, and so on. The results indicated that there were no significant differences among the dose groups within each study. For the study adjusting the overall dose of MXSG, the results showed that both the medium-dose group and high-dose group had significantly higher clinical cured rates compared to the low-dose group (Chi-square value 9.01, p = 0.0111). However, there was no significant benefit between the high-dose group and the medium-dose group (81.58% vs. 81.08%). Regarding phlegm congestion, excluding fever, cough, and dyspnea, both the medium-dose group and high-dose group had significantly higher clinical cured rates than the low-dose group (Chi-square value 6.31, p = 0.0426), and there was no significant benefit between the high-dose group and the medium-dose group (69.23% vs. 75.00%). A total of 5 adverse events were observed, of which only 1 case in the medium-dose group was possibly related to the experimental medication. For the study adjusted the SG dose in MXSG, the results showed that the high-dose group had the highest clinical cured rate, but the inter-group difference was not statistically significant (Chi-square value 3.36, p = 0.1864). The area under the curve (AUC) for cough in the medium-dose group was significantly lower than in the low-dose group and high-dose group (F-test value 3.14, p = 0.0471). Although no significant differences were observed in fever and dyspnea among the groups, the AUC in the high-dose group was lower than in the medium-dose and low-dose groups. In comparing the complete defervescence time, both the high-dose group (p &lt; 0.0001) and the medium-dose group (p = 0.0015) achieved faster than the low-dose group. The high-dose group slightly outperformed the medium-dose group (0.50 (0.50, 0.80) vs. 0.80 (0.40, 1.40)), although the difference was not significant. In the medium-dose group, 1 adverse event was observed, but it was not related to the experimental medication. For the study adjusted the KXR dose in MXSG, the results showed that both the medium-dose group and high-dose group had significantly higher cured rates compared to the low-dose group (Chi-square value 47.05, p &lt; 0.0001). However, there was no significant benefit comparing the high-dose group to the medium-dose group (90.00% vs. 92.50%). Regarding clinical symptoms, the results indicated that for cough (F-test value 3.16, p = 0.0460) and phlegm congestion (F-test value 3.84, p = 0.0243), the AUC for both the medium-dose group and high-dose group were significantly lower than in the low-dose group. Although there was benefit in the high-dose group compared to the medium-dose group, it was not statistically significant. No adverse events were observed during the study period.Conclusion: The synthesis of the three conducted clinical studies collectively indicates that for children with bronchial pneumonia (Wind-heat Blocking the Lung), the basic clinical dose of MXSG may represents an optimal intervention dose based on the accumulated clinical experience of doctors. If the dose is insufficient, the clinical effects might be compromised, but using a higher dose does not significantly enhance benefits. Concerning different symptoms, increasing the overall formula’s dose has a favorable impact on improving phlegm congestion, increasing the SG is effective in improving symptoms such as fever, cough, and dyspnea, while higher dose of KXR is effective in alleviating cough and phlegm congestion. These findings suggest that for MXSG, achieving the optimal intervention dose is crucial to achieve better clinical efficacy. For the SG and KXR, if certain symptoms are more severe, increasing the dose can be considered within safe limits, can lead to significant clinical benefits in symptom improvement. This also explains why the dose of MXSG might vary among clinical doctors, while maintaining a balance between safety and effectiveness. Of course, our study is still exploratory clinical trials, and further studies are needed to confirm our findings.Clinical Trial Registration:https://www.chictr.org.cn/index.html; Identifier: ChiCTR-TRC-13003093, ChiCTR-TRC-13003099.