CHAMGAP
VERIFIEDPassed the Codex final verification and publication gate. Evidence-verification cutoff: 2026-07-12. AI was used for research and drafting; the existence of all 6 cited sources was verified at the original page, followed by blind grading, adversarial audit, and build validation. Methodology v1.0.
Verdict No. 180 · Search date 2026-07-12 · Methodology v1.0

Achyranthes root,
does it really help with Joints?

30-Second Summary
?
Evidence Grade ? · Safety unknown
Judgment deferred because there is no direct human joint trial of single-ingredient Achyranthes.
What the
research shows
No human RCT was identified that directly tested whether a single Achyranthes japonica/bidentata root extract improves knee-osteoarthritis pain, WOMAC, or function. Because there is no human efficacy trial itself, this is judgment deferred (?) rather than no effect (D). The identified human RCTs all tested multi-ingredient formulas and cannot isolate the effect of Achyranthes alone.
What the
ads claim
Advertisements mention 'joints,' 'cartilage,' 'combined with Boswellia,' and 'Achyranthes-containing complexes.' Direct human evidence for single-ingredient Achyranthes needs to be separated from evidence on combination products.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • Achyranthes differs substantially by species and plant part, including Achyranthes japonica and A. bidentata.
  • Combination-ingredient studies were not transferred unchanged to the judgment for single-ingredient Achyranthes.
  • Safety confirmation is needed in pregnancy/lactation, anticoagulant co-use, and kidney disease.
  • This is a reassessment target if original human RCTs are obtained.
ID

Chamgap Semantic Classification Code

Candidate index · review held

UNK.achyranthes-root.UNK.joints.assess.placebo

Unknown > Achyranthes root > Unknown > Joints > Association or change assessment > Placebo

An automated migration candidate, not an issued permanent code; exact claim scope remains under review. This machine-generated migration candidate helps retrieval but is not a permanent assignment. The original verdict ID and URL remain authoritative.

Download semantic index (JSON) · Codebook v1

Gap Measurement · Verdict 180 · ?
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

Park and Lee 2024 (PMID 38559799; DOI 10.4078/jrd.2023.0084) described Achyranthes osteoarthritis evidence as cellular and animal research with no clinical trial; the authors reported no relevant conflict of interest. HL-Joint100 is a 5:4:1 pomegranate:Eucommia:Achyranthes combination, and the MFDS individually recognized dossier reports a human trial with N=85. GCSB-5/Shinbaro is a six-herb formula. The knee study (PMID 23954277) was an N=198, 12-week randomized double-blind multicenter comparison with celecoxib; the hand study (PMID 27449412) randomized 220 and treated 215 in a 12-week double-blind placebo-controlled trial. PG201/Layla is a 12-herb formula; PMID 26821189 was an N=124, 12-week double-blind double-dummy noninferiority comparison. Its comparator, SKI306X, contains no Achyranthes and is not used as Achyranthes evidence. Single-ingredient preclinical studies address inflammation, MMPs, chondrocytes, and rodent models. Manufacturer-supplied study products and unverified funding are distinguished in the evidence table.

02

Why this is classified as ?

Under methodology rule (c), the absence of a human efficacy trial for single-ingredient Achyranthes means ? is retained rather than no effect (D). Combination RCTs can be read as no higher than C, but their results cannot be isolated as an Achyranthes effect. Preclinical signals do not establish a human efficacy grade.

Counterpoint. Evidence could be reassessed if a human trial specifies the Achyranthes species, plant part, dose, and prospectively defined pain, WOMAC, and function endpoints.

✓

Cross-check — AI research and Codex final gate

AI was used for research and drafting. Blind grading, adversarial audit, and the methodology boundary rules were then reapplied before Codex performed the final evidence, grade, copy, and build checks. If a grade cannot be narrowed, both evidence positions and their reasons are published.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Park & Lee 2024 (PMID 38559799)Narrative review; not an RCTNo conflict of interest reportedPresence of clinical Achyranthes OA evidenceStates that evidence is cellular and animal and that there is no clinical trial.Core
Study 2Combination-product human trial85Ingredient-company dossierJoint outcomesA 5:4:1 pomegranate:Eucommia:Achyranthes formula; the Achyranthes effect cannot be isolated.Separate
GCSB-5 knee/hand (PMID 23954277·27449412)Randomized trials of a six-herb formula198; 220 randomized/215 treatedIncludes manufacturer-supplied study productWOMAC, VAS, and AUSCANCombination results are not attributable to Achyranthes alone.Separate
PG201 vs SKI306X (PMID 26821189)Double-blind double-dummy comparison of a 12-herb formula124UnverifiedPain VAS and WOMACPG201 is a combination, and comparator SKI306X contains no Achyranthes.Exclude/separate
Study 5Cell and animal studiesMixedInflammation, MMPs, chondrocytes, and rodentsMechanistic signals, not human efficacy trials.Background
§

Receipt — 6 References

All 6 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-07-12).

Park J, Lee SW. Medical treatment of osteoarthritis: botanical pharmacologic aspect. J Rheum Dis. 2024;31(2):68-78. PMID: 38559799. DOI: 10.4078/jrd.2023.0084.
checked
Park YG, et al. A prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparative study on the safety and efficacy of Celecoxib and GCSB-5, dried extracts of six herbs, for the treatment of osteoarthritis of knee joint. J Ethnopharmacol. 2013;149(3):816-824. PMID: 23954277. DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2013.08.008.
checked
Park JK, et al. Efficacy and Tolerability of GCSB-5 for Hand Osteoarthritis: A Randomized, Controlled Trial. Clin Ther. 2016;38(8):1858-1868.e2. PMID: 27449412. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.06.016.
checked
Ha CW, et al. Prospective, randomized, double-blinded, double-dummy and multicenter phase IV clinical study comparing the efficacy and safety of PG201 (Layla) and SKI306X in patients with osteoarthritis. J Ethnopharmacol. 2016;181:1-7. PMID: 26821189. DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2016.01.029.
checked
Xiong H, Huang TY, Chang YL, Su WT. Achyranthes bidentate extracts protect the IL-1β-induced osteoarthritis of SW1353 chondrocytes. J Biosci Bioeng. 2023;136(6):462-470. PMID: 37778956. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiosc.2023.09.008.
checked
Zhao X, et al. Inhibitory Effects of IL-6-Mediated Matrix Metalloproteinase-3 and -13 by Achyranthes japonica Nakai Root in Osteoarthritis and Rheumatoid Arthritis Mice Models. Pharmaceuticals. 2021;14(8):776. PMID: 34451873. DOI: 10.3390/ph14080776.
checked
Research and draft: AI used · Cross-check: blind grading and adversarial audit
Final verification and publication gate: Codex · Evidence date: 2026-07-12 · Corrections: 1
↺

Correction log — 1

Corrections applied to this verdict, in chronological order. Changes are logged, not erased.

  • 2026-07-11 · Sourcing strengthened (grade unchanged) — Citations were PubMed search links and the existence of a single-ingredient Achyranthes RCT was unclear. On re-search, no human knee-osteoarthritis RCT of single Achyranthes root was found (a 2024 review states 'no clinical trials'); combination products (e.g., GCSB-5) cannot be attributed to Achyranthes alone, and SKI306X does not contain Achyranthes. Because no human efficacy trial exists, '?' is retained rather than D; the search links were replaced with actual literature and the basis strengthened. 2026-07-11 internal audit. (grade ? unchanged)
↗

Cite this verdict

Achyranthes Root × Joints Evidence Grade ? card
[Chamgap] Achyranthes Root × Joints — Evidence Grade ?. 6 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/joint-bone/achyranthes-joint/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.
↑