Traditional Chinese medicine in CKD: myths, facts, and evidence

Clicks: 8
ID: 334126
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #148 of 150 articles by views in nephrology dialysis transplantation

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 150 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is increasingly used among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), particularly in regions where healthcare resources, accessibility and cultural acceptance influence treatment choices. However, its role in the treatment of CKD remains controversial, with conflicting perceptions ranging from therapeutic promise to concerns regarding unproven efficacy and potential toxicity. In this review, we critically examine some myths and facts surrounding TCM use in CKD through the framework of evidence-based medicine. Randomized evidence remains limited, but a few trials have reported clinically relevant signals. In patients with type 2 diabetes and CKD, the multicenter SCHEMATIC trial found that add-on Rehmannia-6-based Chinese medicine was associated with a slower decline in eGFR over 48 weeks. In membranous nephropathy, an earlier multicenter randomized trial of Shenqi particle reported reductions in proteinuria and remission outcomes comparable with conventional immunosuppressive therapy. These findings are hypothesis-supporting rather than definitive: neither trial established a reduction in kidney failure, cardiovascular events or mortality, and independent confirmation is lacking. Importantly, safety should not be inferred from natural origin or historical use. Product quality, botanical authentication, pharmacokinetics, toxicological evaluation, herb-drug interactions and pharmacovigilance are essential components of responsible clinical evaluation. Future research should move beyond the broad question of whether ‘TCM works’ and instead focus on product-specific assessment using rigorous trial methodology, standardized manufacturing, precision CKD phenotyping and internationally applicable outcome measures. Chinese herbal medicines should neither be dismissed solely because they are traditional nor accepted solely because they are natural. Their future role in CKD care should be determined by the same principles applied to any therapeutic intervention: reproducible quality, demonstrated clinical benefit and an acceptable benefit–risk profile.
Reference Key
openalex_W7223680992 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Qi Chen, Yingnan Liang, Jiajia Bai, Zhenjie Chen, Jingwei Zhou
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal nephrology dialysis transplantation
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/ndt/gfag247
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfag247
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.