Efficacy and Safety of Orally Administered East Asian Herbal Medicine Combined with Narrowband Ultraviolet B against Psoriasis: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis and Network Analysis

Abstract

Psoriasis is a chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory skin disease with many complications and a poor prognosis that imposes a significant burden on individuals and society. Narrowband ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) represents a cost-effective non-drug therapeutic intervention for psoriasis. East Asian herbal medicine (EAHM) is currently being investigated for its potential as a safe and effective psoriasis treatment. Consequently, it has the potential to be employed as a combination therapy with NB-UVB. The objective was to ascertain the efficacy and safety of the EAHM with NB-UVB combination therapy and to identify important drugs for further research. In this study, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were retrieved from ten databases in Korea, China, and Japan. All statistical analyses were conducted using R software version 4.3.0. The primary outcomes were the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and the incidence rate of adverse events (AEs), while the secondary outcomes were hematologic markers and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), which reflect the immune-mediated inflammatory pathology of psoriasis. The analysis of 40 RCTs, including 3521 participants, demonstrated that EAHM with NB-UVB combination therapy exhibited a statistically significant superiority over NB-UVB monotherapy with respect to primary and secondary outcomes. The Bayesian network meta-analysis revealed that Investigator Presciption 3 and Ziyin Liangxue Decoction exhibited a consistent relative advantage with respect to each PASI-based efficacy metric. The network analysis estimated the potential influence ranking for all individual herbs according to PageRank centrality. The findings of this study suggest that EAHMs co-administered with NB-UVB may provide additional efficacy and safety-related benefits for patients with psoriasis. However, the quality of evidence is still low, and further high-quality trials are needed to reach more definitive conclusions.