Artesunate and Artemisinin-based Drugs

Our assessments of evidence for each medical benefit fall into one of these categories:

• Strong evidence: consistent, significant effects in several large (or at least one very large) well designed clinical studies or at least two meta-analysesa statistical analysis that combines the results of two or more research studies; the results of smaller research studies addressing the same or similar questions can be analyzed as though they are one bigger, more powerful study of clinical studies of moderate or better quality (or one large meta-analysis) finding similar results
• Good evidence: significant effects in one large or several mid-sized and well-designed clinical studies ( randomized controlled trialsa study design in which people are randomly assigned to either an experimental group or a control group to compare the outcomes from different treatments; an RCT is considered a strong design for determining a therapy’s effects with an appropriate placebo or other strong comparison control or observational studies that control for confounds)
• Modest evidence: significant effects in at least three small but well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs), or one or more well-designed, mid-sized clinical studies of reasonably good quality (RCTs or observationala type of study in which individuals are observed or certain outcomes are measured, but no attempt is made to affect the outcome (for example, no treatment is given); an example is a study that records people’s diets, but doesn’t try to alter their diets, and looks for patterns of disease or other outcomes related to different foods studies), or several small studies aggregated into a meta-analysis
• Preliminary evidence: significant effects in small or poorly designed clinical studies OR conflicting results in adequate studies but a preponderance of evidence of an effect
• Weak evidence: one or more case studies, supported by animal evidence OR small treatment effects of limited clinical significance OR studies with no controls OR weak trends of effects
• Insufficient evidence: preclinical evidence only OR clinical studies with such poor or unclear methodology that no conclusion can be drawn OR conflicting findings across clinical studies with no preponderance of evidence in one direction; conflicting evidence occurs when studies find conflicting effects (positive effect vs no effect or negative effect) with the same treatment and the same general study population (same cancer type, for example)

Learn more about how we research and rate therapies and practices in How We Rate Therapies ›

• Resolved pain among people with stage 3 or 4 squamous cell adenocarcinoma of the cervix taking 200mg of artenimol-R for 28 days in a small uncontrolled studya study in which a therapy is used, but without a comparison group against which to judge outcomes; an uncontrolled trial is considered a weak study design⁸Jansen FH, Adoubi I et al. First study of oral Artenimol-R in advanced cervical cancer: clinical benefit, tolerability and tumor markers. Anticancer Research. 2011 Dec;31(12):4417-22.

• Resolved vaginal discharge among people with stage 3 or 4 squamous cell adenocarcinoma of the cervix taking 200mg of artenimol-R for 28 days in a small uncontrolled studya study in which a therapy is used, but without a comparison group against which to judge outcomes; an uncontrolled trial is considered a weak study design⁹Jansen FH, Adoubi I et al. First study of oral Artenimol-R in advanced cervical cancer: clinical benefit, tolerability and tumor markers. Anticancer Research. 2011 Dec;31(12):4417-22.

• No evidence of an effect on tumor recurrence in a person with prostate cancer who had developed resistance to artemisinin and was subsequently treated with artesunate¹⁰Michaelsen FW, Saeed ME, Schwarzkopf J, Efferth T. Activity of Artemisia annua and artemisinin derivatives, in prostate carcinoma. Phytomedicine. 2015 Dec 15;22(14):1223-31.