| Literature DB >> 23573159 |
Xiaolin Yang1, Fei Li, Yanan Yang, Jinyang Shen, Run Zou, Panpan Zhu, Chunfeng Zhang, Zhonglin Yang, Ping Li.
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of <span class="Chemical">echinacoside (<span class="Chemical">ECH) using an osteopenia rat model. Forty-eight 6-month-old female Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly divided into one sham-operated group (SHAM) and five OVX (ovariectomized) subgroups: SHAM with vehicle 0.5% carboxymethylcellulose sodium (0.5% CMC-Na) and OVX with vehicle (OVX), OVX with 17 β -estradiol (E2), and OVX with ECH of graded doses (ECH-L, ECH-M, and ECH-H). The effects of ECH and E2 on serum biochemical parameters, bone mineral density (BMD), bone biomechanical properties, bone microarchitecture, and immunohistochemistry were examined, and safety assessments were also evaluated. The results showed that ECH treatments improved total femur BMD, bone microarchitecture, and biomechanical properties and decreased serum marker levels in comparison to OVX group. Moreover, ECH administration significantly increased osteoprotegerin (OPG) level, and decreased receptor activator of nuclear factor- κ B ligand (RANKL) level in serum, as well as in proximal femur. Importantly, ECH treatment ameliorated the lipid parameters without the overall incidences of adverse events of uterus and mammary gland compared to OVX and SHAM groups. This study demonstrated that administration of ECH for 12 weeks can effectively and safely prevent OVX-induced osteoporosis in rats via increasing the OPG/RANKL ratio.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23573159 PMCID: PMC3615573 DOI: 10.1155/2013/926928
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Chemical structure of echinacoside (ECH).
Serum parameters after 12-week administration of ECH.
| Group | SHAM | OVX | E2 | ECH-L | ECH-M | ECH-H |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ALP (U/100 mL) | 10.96 ± 1.36 | 14.76 ± 2.86## | 11.66 ± 1.88* | 12.20 ± 1.22* | 12.00 ± 1.56* | 10.95 ± 1.97** |
| TRACP-5b (U/L) | 0.306 ± 0.026 | 0.367 ± 0.054# | 0.294 ± 0.054* | 0.277 ± 0.084* | 0.231 ± 0.088** | 0.227 ± 0.082** |
| OPG (pg/mL) | 610.32 ± 85.29 | 516.36 ± 65.35# | 621.41 ± 121.78* | 631.77 ± 131.64* | 729.42 ± 122.59** | 775.29 ± 179.87** |
| RANKL (pg/mL) | 6.44 ± 0.55 | 7.38 ± 0.83# | 7.19 ± 1.75 | 6.38 ± 0.58* | 6.15 ± 1.01* | 5.75 ± 1.21** |
| OPG/RANKL ratio | 95.09 ± 13.44 | 70.32 ± 8.53## | 92.74 ± 35.72 | 100.75 ± 28.50* | 121.41 ± 29.23** | 138.98 ± 39.16** |
The data are expressed as mean ± SD, n = 8. # P < 0.05 and ## P < 0.01 versus SHAM group, *P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01 versus OVX group at the same time point as evaluated by ANOVA.
BMD, Micro-CT properties of femoral trabeculae and biomechanical test of femur after 12-week administration of ECH.
| Group | SHAM | OVX | E2 | ECH-L | ECH-M | ECH-H |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BMD (g/cm2) | 0.28 ± 0.01 | 0.22 ± 0.01## | 0.26 ± 0.01** | 0.25 ± 0.01** | 0.26 ± 0.01** | 0.28 ± 0.01** |
| BV/TV (%) | 58.71 ± 6.38 | 16.42 ± 3.44## | 34.52 ± 3.38** | 23.22 ± 4.07* | 26.12 ± 2.02** | 28.80 ± 2.53** |
| Tb.N (1/mm) | 3.88 ± 0.25 | 2.18 ± 0.48## | 3.01 ± 0.10* | 2.76 ± 0.58 | 3.02 ± 0.38* | 3.12 ± 0.41* |
| Tb.Sp ( | 106.52 ± 14.78 | 452.02 ± 65.48## | 219.83 ± 9.99** | 355.04 ± 41.53* | 321.98 ± 28.59* | 279.57 ± 23.15** |
| Tb.Th ( | 152.28 ± 22.30 | 84.05 ± 7.19## | 114.24 ± 8.13** | 97.12 ± 7.47* | 112.06 ± 20.16* | 115.32 ± 10.79** |
| SMI | 0.78 ± 0.12 | 2.77 ± 0.49## | 1.41 ± 0.25** | 2.11 ± 0.15* | 1.90 ± 0.43* | 1.86 ± 0.17* |
| Maximum load (N) | 87.54 ± 5.86 | 60.00 ± 3.35## | 89.71 ± 6.45** | 83.05 ± 7.81** | 83.70 ± 6.49** | 93.31 ± 13.66** |
| Stiffness (N/mm) | 190.98 ± 36.03 | 147.56 ± 12.54# | 189.81 ± 18.33** | 173.17 ± 24.52* | 178.67 ± 18,55** | 197.79 ± 32.05** |
| Energy to ultimate load | 17.33 ± 2.58 | 12.00 ± 1.79## | 18.67 ± 3.01** | 25.67 ± 2.88** | 25.83 ± 3.13** | 34.00 ± 4.65** |
The data are expressed as mean ± SD, n = 6. # P < 0.05 and ## P < 0.01 versus SHAM group, *P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01 versus OVX group at the same time point as evaluated by ANOVA.
Figure 2Representative Micro-CT images of trabecular bone microarchitecture in the distal femurs. (a) SHAM group, (b) OVX group, (c) E2 group, (d) ECH-L group, (e) ECH-M group, and (f) ECH-H group. The OVX rats presented notable reduction in the trabecular number, trabecular area compared with the SHAM rats. ECH and E2 partially prevented OVX-induced trabecular bone loss and significantly improved trabecular bone mass and microarchitecture.
Figure 3Serum TC and TG levels were determined by assay kit after sacrifice at 12 weeks. Data were expressed as mean ± SD, error bars in the figure are presented as SD, n = 8 specimens/group. # P < 0.05 and ## P < 0.01 versus sham group, *P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01 versus OVX group at the same time point as evaluated by ANOVA.
Serum CEA, CA-125 levels and incidence of principal microscopic pharmacologic effects of ECH and E2 on female rat's uteri and mammary glands.
| Group | SHAM | OVX | E2 | ECH-L | ECH-M | ECH-H |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serum parameters |
| |||||
| Serum CEA (pg/mL) | 341.82 ± 32.94 | 331.08 ± 36.97 | 511.11 ± 62.39##∗∗ | 346.03 ± 28.62 | 342.22 ± 42.57 | 330.67 ± 60.93 |
| Serum CA-125 (U/mL) | 1.89 ± 0.40 | 1.52 ± 0.39 | 2.43 ± 0.24##∗∗ | 1.37 ± 0.29* | 1.32 ± 0.41* | 1.08 ± 0.27#∗∗ |
| Uteri |
| |||||
| Endometrium thickness changes | ++ | + | +++ | + | + | + |
| Immunohistochemical analysis of CEA | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Mammary glands |
| |||||
| Proliferative changes | + | — | ++ | — | — | — |
| Tubular changes | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Ductal intraepithelial neoplasia | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Carcinoma of breast | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Immunohistochemical analysis of CEA | — | — | + | — | — | — |
The data are expressed as mean ± SD, n = 8. # P < 0.05 and ## P < 0.01 versus SHAM group, *P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01 versus OVX group at the same time point as evaluated by ANOVA.
+: minimal; ++: mild; +++: marked; —: not observed, the qualitative system according to [23] used previously.