Inflammation is the body’s response to damage， infection or other stimuli， but its excessive or continuous development can lead to a variety of diseases. Although modern medical anti-inflammatory therapies were widely used， it is often accompanied by limitations such as more adverse reactions. Based on the “holistic view” and “differential treatment”， traditional Chinese medicine （TCM） regards inflammation as a manifestation of the imbalance of yin and yang in the body and the conflict between good and evil. The application of anti-inflammatory TCM is not only aimed at the pathological state of “inflammation”， but also based on the overall consideration of “syndrome”. According to different types of syndrome， anti-inflammatory TCM can be divided into heat-clearing and detoxifying agents （such as Lonicera japonica and Isatis indigotica ）， heat-clearing and drying dampness agents （such as Coptidis Rhizoma）， blood-activating and stasis-dissolving agents （such as Salvia miltiorrhiza ） and vital qi-strengthening and pathogenic factor-expelling agents （such as Panax ginseng ）. Four types of anti-inflammatory TCM restore the body’s immune balance through the systematic regulation of multi-component， multi-target and multi-pathway， exhibiting a good anti-inflammatory effect. Future research should focus on integrating systematic biology， applying artificial intelligence， carrying out high-quality evidence-based research， and combining traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine， so as to reveal the overall regulatory law of anti-inf lammatory effects of TCM and promote clinical rational use.

Debates persist regarding the efficacy and safety of azvudine, particularly its real-world outcomes. This study involved patients aged ≥60 years who were admitted to 25 hospitals in mainland China with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between December 1, 2022, and February 28, 2023. Efficacy outcomes were all-cause mortality during hospitalization, the proportion of patients discharged with recovery, time to nucleic acid-negative conversion (T _NANC), time to symptom improvement (T _SI), and time of hospital stay (T _HS). Safety was also assessed. Among the 5884 participants identified, 1999 received azvudine, and 1999 matched controls were included after exclusion and propensity score matching. Azvudine recipients exhibited lower all-cause mortality compared with controls in the overall population (13.3% vs. 17.1%, RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67-0.90; P = 0.001) and in the severe subgroup (25.7% vs. 33.7%; RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.88; P < 0.001). A higher proportion of patients discharged with recovery, and a shorter T _NANC were associated with azvudine recipients, especially in the severe subgroup. The incidence of adverse events in azvudine recipients was comparable to that in the control group (2.3% vs. 1.7%, P = 0.170). In conclusion, azvudine showed efficacy and safety in older patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during the SARS-CoV-2 omicron wave in China.