Rather than list Wikipedia, why not the "mini perspective" that The Wiki authors are quoting on that page? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5346970/

It's IMO worth a read. A couple of things jump out:

- there is a lot of ongoing work to make a commercial drug out of 'traditional' herbals.

-curcumin interferes with assay readouts, making any studies that don't account for that interference problematic.

-the authors consider curcumin a "black hole" for research funds, in spite of other successful drugs (notably artemisin and invermectin) that have come from the study of herbals.

All that said, I'd expect multiple clinical studies as curcumin is GRAS - and there look to be quite a few ongoing: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aclinicaltrials.gov+curcumin

(using google search as I had issues with the site one).

And finally, there's a PubMed overview of curcumin: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/290654

TL;DR: in spite of an overview warning research organizations from spending a lot of money trying to find a magic bullet, the jury appears to be still out.