| Literature DB >> 24527050 |
Weifeng Ji1, Haiying Huang2, Ji Chao3, Wuchao Lu1, Jianyou Guo4.
Abstract
Objective. The present investigation examined the neuroprotective effect of Agaricus brasiliensis (AbS) against STZ-induced diabetic neuropathic pain in laboratory rats. STZ-induced diabetic rats were administered orally with AbS. Body weight, serum glucose, and behavioral parameters were measured before and at the end of the experiment to see the effect of AbS on these parameters. After 6 weeks of treatments, all animals were sacrificed to study various biochemical parameters. Treatment with AbS 80 mg/kg in diabetic animals showed significant increase in body weight, pain threshold, and paw withdrawal threshold and significant decrease in serum glucose, LPO and NO level, Na-K-ATPase level, and TNF- α and IL-1 β level as compared to vehicle treated diabetic animals in dose and time dependent manner. AbS can offer pain relief in PDN. This may be of potential benefit in clinical practice for the management of diabetic neuropathy.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24527050 PMCID: PMC3913527 DOI: 10.1155/2014/679259
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Effect of AbS treatment on body weight. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6). The data was analysed using and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Dunnett's test. *P < 0.05 versus diabetic group.
Effect of AbS and other treatments on blood glucose levels in STZ-hyperglycemic rats.
| Different groups | Blood glucose (mg/dL) |
|---|---|
| STZ- and saline-treated | 310.20 ± 2.111 |
| STZ- and AbS 80-treated | 140.56 ± 2.150** |
| STZ- and AbS 40-treated | 196.60 ± 3.226* |
| STZ- and AbS 20-treated | 238.93 ± 2.836 |
| Control group | 105.94 ± 1.223 |
Values are shown as means ± SEM. *P < 0.05 versus diabetic group, **P < 0.01 versus diabetic group.
Figure 2Effect of AbS treatment on tail withdrawal latency. Results are expressed as Mean ± SEM (n = 6). The data was analysed using and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Dunnett's test. *P < 0.05 versus diabetic group, **P < 0.01 versus diabetic group.
Figure 3Effect of AbS treatment on paw withdrawal threshold. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6). The data was analysed using and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Dunnett's test. *P < 0.05 versus diabetic group, **P < 0.01 versus diabetic group.
Figure 4Effect of AbS treatment on paw withdrawal latency in warm plate test. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6). The data was analysed using and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Dunnett's test. *P < 0.05 versus diabetic group, **P < 0.01 versus diabetic group.
Effect of AbS and other treatments on LPO and NO level.
| Different groups | LPO (nM/mg of protein) | NO ( |
|---|---|---|
| STZ- and saline-treated | 12.29 ± 0.33 | 288.30 ± 6.25 |
| STZ- and AbS 80-treated | 6.11 ± 0.40** | 169.10 ± 11.21* |
| STZ- and AbS 40-treated | 8.22 ± 0.32* | 223.21 ± 22.71 |
| STZ- and AbS 20-treated | 10.00 ± 0.12 | 242.20 ± 18.70 |
| Control group | 2.20 ± 0.21 | 108.22 ± 8.13 |
Values are shown as means ± SEM. *P < 0.05 versus diabetic group, **P < 0.01 versus diabetic group.
Effect of AbS and other treatments on SOD and Na+K+ATPase level.
| Different groups | SOD (U/mg of protein) | Na+K+ATPase ( |
|---|---|---|
| STZ- and saline-treated | 5.80 ± 0.66 | 2.29 ± 0.30 |
| STZ- and AbS 80-treated | 20.80 ± 0.63* | 9.11 ± 0.40* |
| STZ- and AbS 40-treated | 11.60 ± 0.22 | 6.22 ± 0.32 |
| STZ- and AbS 20-treated | 8.93 ± 0.36 | 4.00 ± 0.10 |
| Control group | 29.66 ± 0.80 | 12.20 ± 1.20 |
Values are shown as means ± SEM. *P < 0.05 versus diabetic group.
Effect of AbS and other treatments on TNF-α level.
| Different groups | TNF- | IL-1 |
|---|---|---|
| STZ- and saline-treated | 128.29 ± 10.33 | 130.29 ± 22.30 |
| STZ- and AbS 80-treated | 76.11 ± 10.40** | 56.55 ± 9.22** |
| STZ- and AbS 40-treated | 108.22 ± 10.30* | 94.11 ± 8.40* |
| STZ- and AbS 20-treated | 111.0 0 ± 10.10 | 116.10 ± 22.41** |
| Control group | 52.23 ± 4. 20 | 22.20 ± 2. 20 |
Values are shown as means ± SEM. *P < 0.05 versus diabetic group, **P < 0.01 versus diabetic group.