| Literature DB >> 27713248 |
Alexander Panossian1, Georg Wikman2.
Abstract
Adaptogens were initially defined as substances that enhance the "state of nonspecific resistance" in stress, a physiological condition that is linked with various disorders of the neuroendocrine-immune system. Studies on animals and isolated neuronal cells have revealed that adaptogens exhibit neuroprotective, anti-fatigue, antidepressive, anxiolytic, nootropic and CNS stimulating activity. In addition, a number of clinical trials demonstrate that adaptogens exert an anti-fatigue effect that increases mental work capacity against a background of stress and fatigue, particularly in tolerance to mental exhaustion and enhanced attention. Indeed, recent pharmacological studies of a number of adaptogens have provided a rationale for these effects also at the molecular level. It was discovered that the stress-protective activity of adaptogens was associated with regulation of homeostasis via several mechanisms of action, which was linked with the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and the regulation of key mediators of stress response, such as molecular chaperons (e.g., HSP70), stress-activated c-Jun N-terminal protein kinase 1 (JNK1), Forkhead box O (FOXO) transcription factor DAF-16, cortisol and nitric oxide.Entities:
Keywords: Hsp70; adaptogens; clinical trials; fatigue; herbal medicine; neuroprotection
Year: 2010 PMID: 27713248 PMCID: PMC3991026 DOI: 10.3390/ph3010188
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8247
Figure 1Adaptogens increase the state of non-specific resistance in stress and decrease sensitivity to stressors, which results in stress protection, and prolong the phase of resistance (stimulatory effect). Instead of exhaustion, a higher level of equilibrium (the homeostasis) is attained the heterostasis. The higher it is, the better the adaptation to stress. Thus, the stimulating and anti-fatigue effect of adaptogens has been documented in both in animals and in humans. Adapted from [26,78,133].
Pharmacological profile of adaptogens: summary of in vitro or in animal studies.
| Regulatory System: effect | Pharmacological Effects |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stress-system (neuro-endocrine-immune complex): Anti-stress/stress-mimetic/ stress-protective | CNS-stimulating: enhancing of physical performance, cognitive performance (learning and memory) | + | + | + |
| Neuroprotective | + | + | ||
| Hepatoprotective | + | + | + | |
| Cardioprotective | + | + | ||
| Gastroprotective | + | + | ||
| Oxidative stress/Radioprotective | + | + | + | |
| Anti-atherosclerosis | + | + | ||
| Vasodilatatory/hypotensive | + | |||
| Anti-hyperglycemic | + | |||
| Anti-inflammatory/allergy | + | + | + | |
| Immunotropic | + | + | + | |
| Antidepressive | + | |||
| Anxiolitic | + | + |
A selected pharmacological profile of adaptogens, clinical efficacy in humans relative to CNS.
| Pathophysiological condition |
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Neuro-endocrine system | Physical fatigue | + | + | ++ |
| Mental fatigue (declined attention) | ++ | + | + | |
| Stress induced chronic fatigue | + | + | ||
| Depression | + |
Summary of the pharmacological activities of Schisandra chinensis, adapted from [26].
| Regulatory system | Pharmacological effect | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Stress-system | Central and vegetative nervous system | Stimulating effect | Adapto-genic effect |
| Endocrine system | Stress-mimetic and stress-protective effect | ||
| Immune system | Stress protective effect | ||
Figure 2Active compounds isolated from Rhodiola rosea (tyrosol, salidroside, rosiridin), Eleutherococcus senticosus (eyringin, eleutheroside E), Schisandra chinensis (schizandrin), Panax ginseng (ginsenosides), Withania somiphera (sitoindosides), Bryonia alba (cucurbitacin R glucoside).
Figure 3Fixed combination of Rhodiola rosea, Schisandra chinensis and Eleutherococcus senticosus extracts (ADAPT-232/Chisan) causes a concentration-dependant increase in life span of N2 wild-type C. elegans. A highly significant change in longevity is observed when Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (log-rank test) is used to compare between groups (p = 0.001) (Panosyan and Wiegant, unpublished data, 2005).
Figure 4A simplified schematic showing the hypothetical molecular mechanism of ADAPT-232 as it induces stress resistance (adaptation to stress) and enhances cognitive functions and, possibly, longevity. Adapted from [23].
The differences in properties between adaptogens and other stimulants, adapted from [77,78,113,136].
| Characteristic | Stimulants | Adaptogens | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Recovery process after exhaustive physical load | Low | High |
| 2. | Energy depletion | Yes | No |
| 3. | Performance in stress | – | Increased |
| 4. | Survival in stress | – | Increased |
| 5. | Quality of arousal | Poor | Good |
| 6. | Addiction potential | Yes | No |
| 7. | Side effects | Yes | Rare |
| 8. | DNA/RNA and proteins synthesis | Decreased | Increased |
Results of clinical studies on humans involving effects of plant adaptogens on physical and mental performance related to fatigue.
| Plant name Intervention/ control/ Daily dose/ Duration | Study designa/ Total subjects | Primary endpoint and main resultsb | Quality level ofevidence* | Jadad score [ | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R, PC, DB 2 parallel groups 60 volunteers with stress-induced fatigue, (30/30) [20–55 years] | Symptoms of fatigue, attention, depression, QOL, salivary cortisol. Symptoms of fatigue, attention and salivary cortisol significantly improved compared with control | Ib | 5 | [ | |
| R, PC, CO, DB 2 parallel groups 56 healthy subjects (?/?)c [24–35 years] | Mental fatigue, perceptive and cognitive functions such as associative thinking, short-term memory, calculation and ability of concentration, and speed of audio-visual perception Statistically significant improvement in the treatment group (SHR-5) during the first 2 week period | Ib | 4 | [ | |
| R, PC, DB 2 parallel groups 40 healthy subjects (20/20) [17–19 years] | Mental fatigue, physical performance, general well-being Significant improvement in physical fitness, mental fatigue and neuromotor tests compared with control (p<0.01). General well-being was also significantly (p<0.05) better in the verum group. No significance was seen in the correction of text tests or a neuromuscular tapping test | Ib | 3 | [ | |
| R, PC, DB | Capacity for mental work | Ib | 3 | [ | |
| groups | groups compared with control (p<0.001), whilst no significant difference between the two dosage groups was observed. | ||||
| R, PC, DB | Depression in total HAMD and BDI scores | Ib | 5 | [ | |
| R, PC, DB | RVI measurement of fatigue reduced | Ib | 5 | [ | |
| Chisan-fixed combination of Rhodiola-Schisandra-Eleutherococcus | R, PC, DB | Duration of antibiotic therapy associated with the clinical manifestations of the acute phase of the disease, mental performance and self-evaluation by WHO-QOL brief questionnaires | Ib | 4 | [ |
| ADAPT-232 capsules [fixed combination of standardised extracts of | PC, CO, DB | Compared with placebo, ADAPT-232 significantly increased short-term memory, speed and reliability in the understanding of information, and precision and accuracy in the ability to reproduce the information in repeated highly sophisticated computer-based tests (Monotonic 2). ADAPT-232 was most effective against a background of pronounced fatigue induced by monotonous night work. The effect was most marked in complicated tests and under extreme conditions.ADAPT-232 significantly decreased the number of mistakes ( | IIa | 1 | [ |
| PC, CO, OL | IIa | 1 | [ | ||
| PC, SB | Single and repeated administration of adaptogens improved functional state of the CNS in patients with neurosis as characterised by normalisation of the speed and power of neural processes in Ivanov-Smolenski’s verbal test with speech-supported locomotor-conditioned reflex measurement. The memory improved and attention became more stable. | IIa | 1 | [ | |
| Rhodosin (R. rosea extract, 100 mg/ 20 days | PC, DB | Significant improvement in physical fitness, mental fatigue and neuromotor tests compared with control (p<0.01): general well-being was also significantly (p<0.05) better in the verum group. No significance was seen in the correction of text tests or a neuromuscular tapping test. | IIa | 1 | [ |
| Rodelim tablets (fixed combination of the extracts of | PC, DB 60 | Rodelim improved mental working capacity in computer and correction tests against a background of fatigue. | IIa | 1 | [ |
| PC/85 | Improved mental performance, reduced the number of errors in Anfimov’s correction test: the stimulating effect lasted 4 h or more | IIb | 1 | [ | |
| PC/254 | Improved mental performance; reduced the number of errors in Anfimov’s correction test; increased the accuracy, working capacity and speed of information perception. Stimulating effect lasted 4 h or more | IIa | 1 | [ | |
| Tyrosol (1, 5, 10 and 20 mg), | ? / | Improved mental performance, reduced the number of errors in Anfimov’s correction test. | III | 0 | [ |
| Salidroside, | PC, SB/ | Improved mental performance; reduced the number of errors in Anfimov’s correction test; stimulating effect lasting 4 h or more. | IIa | 1 | [ |
| PC, DB/40 | Improved mental performance determined by a letter correction test | IIa | 1 | [ | |
| PC, SB,CO/ | Decreased errors in data sent by radio operators 1 h after drug uptake. Stimulating effect of | IIa | 1 | [ | |
| Eleutherococcus (extract 1250 mg) | PC, CO | Selective memory significantly improved compared with placebo (p<0.02). | IIa | 1 | [ |
| PC, CO, OL | Eleutherococcus and Rhaponticum treatment significantly increased precision in tremometric test compared with placebo. Significant differences compared with placebo were observed with various doses of all tested preparations in psychometric tests including assessment of attention and memory functions. | IIa | 1 | [ | |
| PC, CO | Pilots were tested before a flight and again 5 –15 min later, and finally 1 and 3 h after landing Significant differences compared with placebo were observed for all tested preparations in tests including assessment of precision, dynamic tremometry, sensomotor response, and attention and memory functions | IIa | 1 | [ | |
| OL, PC | IIb | 0 | [ | ||
| CO, PC, SB, | Improved attention in text correction 2 h after drug administration. Both extracts increased quality and quantity of mental work performed. | IIa | 1 | [ | |
| CO, PC | IIa | 1 | [ | ||
| OL,CO/20 | Improved accuracy in error correction test. Most active stimulating effect was revealed by a crystalline substance identified as the lignan schizandrin. | IIb | 0 | [ | |
| Schizandrin (0.02, 0.01, 0.005 g), Phenamine (0.2 g) Glucose (0.5g) acute | PC/23 | Schizandrin improved accuracy in the work of telegraph operators at exhaustion compared with control group (glucose) and those given phenamine. | IIb | 1 | [ |
| OL / | Beneficial effects on symptoms of astheno-depressive syndrome | IIIa | 0 | [ | |
| OL/ | Stimulating effect-improve mood, increases physical and psychological vivacity, relief of tiredness and fatigue in asthenia and depressions. | III | 0 | [ | |
| OL/ | Stimulating and tonic effct. | III | 0 | [ | |
| OL/ | Effective in the treatment of general asthenia, exhaustion and reduced physical and mental performance in group of patients with nervous disorders where an increase in general well-being and working capacity, as well as a decrease in sleepiness and exhaustion, were observed. | III | 0 | [ | |
| OL, observational study/ | Stimulating effect in astheno-depressive syndrome with relief of somnolence, limpness, tiredness, fatigue | III | 0 | [ |
R – Randomized, PC – placebo– controlled; DB – double– blind; SB – single blind, NC – not controlled; CO – crossover, UC – uncontrolled, OL – open label trial; According to WHO, FDA and EMEA: Ia – meta– analyses of randomised and controlled studies; Ib – evidence from at least one randomised study with control ; IIa – evidence from at least one well– performed study with control group; IIb – evidence from at least one well– performed quasi– experimental study; III – evidence from well– performed non– experimental descriptive studies as well as comparative studies, correlation studies and case– studies; and IV – evidence from expert committee reports or appraisals and/or clinical experiences by prominent authorities; c ? – data not listed or unavailable.* –max 5.
Summary of clinical trials of Rhodiola rosea and Schisandra preparations in psychiatric disorders.
| Pathophysiological condition: Pharmacological activity or effect recorded | Plant name | Reference | Study design | Quality in Jadad’s score | Number of patients |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| Olsson, 2009 | R,PC,DB | 5 | 60 |
|
|
| Fintelman, 2007 | OL | 0 | 120 |
|
|
| Darbinyan, 2007 | R,PC,DB | 5 | 91 |
| Brychenko, 1987** | OL, C** | 0 | 78/56** | ||
| Staritsina, 1946 | OL, UC | 0 | 37 | ||
|
|
| Krasik, 1970* | OL, UC | 0 | 128 |
|
| Krasik, 1970* | OL, UC | 0 | 135/27 | |
|
| Mikhailova, 1983 | OL | 0 | 58 | |
|
| Mesheryakova, 1975 | OL | 0 | 25 | |
| Zakharov, 1956 | OL, UC | 0 | 13 | ||
|
| Leman, 1952 | OL, UC | 0 | 40 | |
| S.chinensis | Rossijskij, 1952 | OL, Uc | 0 | 260 | |
|
|
| Saratikov, 1965* | OL | 0 | 65 |
|
| Kaliko, 1966 | PC, SB | 1 | 70/80$ | |
|
| Sudakov, 1986 | OL, UC | 0 | 386* | |
|
|
| Bystritsky, 2008 | OL | 0 | 10 |
|
| Romas, 1958, 1962 | OL | 0 | 79/41* | |
|
| Zakharova, 1948* | OL, C | 0 | 30/20* | |
| Lastovetskiy, | OL | 0 | 48 |
R – Randomized, PC – placebo– controlled; DB – double– blind; SB – single blind, NC – not controlled; CO – crossover, UC – uncontrolled, OL – open label trial; c ? – data not listed or unavailable.* – mixed patients population, sick/heatly subjects. ** – adjuvant therapy with antidepressants, control group – tricyclic antidepressants. $ – sick/heatly subjects.