Systematic review reports that ginger-based formulations reduce allergic rhinitis symptoms in humans and animals, suggesting potential therapeutic benefits.
BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis is a chronic non-communicable disease that adversely affects respiratory health and quality of life. Ginger-based formulations, owing to their anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties, may offer a promising alternative therapeutic option. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and meta-analyze evidence from animal studies and human randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of ginger-based formulations in allergic rhinitis. METHODS: A systematic search of the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus (April 2025) identified studies comparing ginger-based formulations with control interventions. Outcomes included clinical symptoms and relevant biomarkers. Risk of bias was assessed using the SYRCLE tool for animal studies and RoB2 for human studies. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects models, with results expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Twenty-one studies (6 animal and 15 human studies) were included. In rodents, ginger-based formulations significantly reduced nasal rubbing (SMD = -1.99; 95%CI, -3.15 to -0.83), sneezing (SMD = -1.99; 95%CI, -2.78 to -1.20), and biomarkers (IL-4, IL-5, and OVA-specific IgE). In humans, ginger-based formulations significantly improved itching (SMD = -0.51; 95%CI, -0.79 to -0.24), runny nose (SMD = -0.59; 95%CI, -0.87 to -0.30), sneezing (SMD = -0.56; 95%CI, -0.75 to -0.37), total nasal symptom scores (SMD = -0.63; 95%CI, -1.00 to -0.26), and quality of life (SMD = -0.56; 95%CI, -0.87 to -0.24), and eosinophil levels. CONCLUSION: Ginger-based formulations improve symptoms and biomarkers of allergic rhinitis in both animal and human studies. As many interventions are multi-component, the observed effects are more appropriately attributed to the overall formulations rather than ginger alone. Further research is needed to explore mechanisms and clarify clinical applications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Inpan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: