| Literature DB >> 27891094 |
Kate Nelson1, James T Lyles2, Tracy Li2, Alessandro Saitta3, Eugenia Addie-Noye2, Paula Tyler4, Cassandra L Quave5.
Abstract
Propionibacterium acnes is implicated in the pathogenesis of acne vulgaris, which impacts >85% of teenagers. Novel therapies are in high demand and an ethnopharmacological approach to discovering new plant sources of anti-acne therapeutics could contribute to filling this void in effective therapies. The aims of our study were two-fold: (1) To determine if species identified in ethnopharmacological field studies as having traditional uses for skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI) exhibit significantly more activity against P. acnes than species with no such reported use; and (2) Chemically characterize active extracts and assess their suitability for future investigation. Extracts of Italian medicinal (for acne and other skin infection) and randomly collected plants and fungi were screened for growth-inhibitory and anti-biofilm activity in P. acnes using broth microdilution methods. Bioactive extracts were chemically characterized by HPLC and examined for cytotoxicity against human keratinocytes (HaCaTs). Following evaluation of 157 extracts from 10 fungi and 58 plants, we identified crude extracts from seven species exhibiting growth inhibitory activity (MICs 64-256 μg mL-1). All active extracts were examined for cytotoxicity against HaCaTs; extracts from one fungal and one plant species were toxic (IC50 256 μg mL-1). HPLC analysis with chemical standards revealed many of these extracts contained chlorogenic acid, p-coumaric acid, ellagic acid, gallic acid, and tannic acid. In conclusion, species used in traditional medicine for the skin exhibited significantly greater (p < 0.05) growth inhibitory and biofilm eradication activity than random species, supporting the validity of an ethnobotanical approach to identifying new therapeutics. The anti-acne activity of three extracts is reported for the first time: Vitis vinifera leaves, Asphodelus microcarpus leaves, and Vicia sativa aerial parts.Entities:
Keywords: Propionibacterium acnes; acne; antibiotics; antimicrobials; biofilms; ethnopharmacology; medicinal plants
Year: 2016 PMID: 27891094 PMCID: PMC5103262 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2016.00425
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pharmacol ISSN: 1663-9812 Impact factor: 5.810
Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of plant extracts (μg mL.
| Caesar's mushroom | − | fb | MeOH | − | − | |
| Lingzhi mushroom | − | fb | MeOH | − | − | |
| H2O | − | − | ||||
| − | − | fb | MeOH | − | − | |
| − | − | fb | H2O | − | − | |
| − | − | fb | MeOH | − | − | |
| H2O | − | − | ||||
| Giant polypore | − | fb | MeOH | − | − | |
| H2O | − | − | ||||
| − | − | fb | MeOH | − | − | |
| H2O | − | − | ||||
| Tinder fungus | − | fb | MeOH | − | − | |
| H2O | − | − | ||||
| Tender nesting polypore | − | fb | MeOH | 128 | 256 | |
| H2O | − | − | ||||
| Turkey tail | − | fb | MeOH | − | − | |
| H2O | − | − | ||||
| Dwarf Elder | + | infl | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| le | EtOH | − | − | |||
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| st | EtOH | − | − | |||
| Elderberry | + | fr | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| le | EtOH | − | − | |||
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| wp | EtOH | − | − | |||
| infl | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Onion | + | le; bu | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| Queen Anne's lace | − | le; st | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| infl; infr | EtOH | − | − | |||
| Giant fennel | − | fr | EtOH | − | − | |
| st | EtOH | − | − | |||
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| infl | MeOH | − | − | |||
| ro | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Fennel | − | le; st | EtOH | − | − | |
| Fennel | − | le; st | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| Bigleaf periwinkle | − | le; st; ro | MeOH | − | − | |
| Italian lords and ladies | − | st | EtOH | − | − | |
| fr | EtOH | − | − | |||
| sta | EtOH | − | − | |||
| le | EtOH | − | − | |||
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| Tassel hyacinth | − | le; infl | MeOH | − | − | |
| bu | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Common yarrow | + | infl | EtOH | − | − | |
| le; st | EtOH | − | − | |||
| le; st; fl | EtOH | − | − | |||
| MEOH | − | − | ||||
| Whitebuttons | − | le; st; fl | EtOH | − | − | |
| Chicory | − | le; st; fl | EtOH | − | − | |
| Common goldenthistle | − | le; st; fl | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| Coltsfoot | − | le; st; ro | EtOH | − | − | |
| le; st; fl | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Whitetop | − | fl; st; le; ro | MeOH | − | − | |
| Fuller's teasel | − | le; st | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| fl | EtOH | − | − | |||
| Field scabiosa | − | le;st;fl | EtOH | − | − | |
| − | − | le; st; fl | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| Alpine honeysuckle | − | wp | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| le | EtOH | − | − | |||
| Bouncingbet | − | le; st; fl | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| Western brackenfern | − | st | MeOH | − | − | |
| Silver wattle | − | infl | MeOH | − | − | |
| le | MeOH | − | − | |||
| st | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Common kidneyvetch | − | le; st; fl | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| Montpellier milk vetch | − | fl; le; ro; st | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| Scorpion senna | − | wst | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| le; fl | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Sweetclover | − | le; st; fl | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| − | − | le; st; fl | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| Black locust | − | le | MeOH | − | − | |
| Garden vetch | − | le; st; fl | MeOH | 128 | 256 | |
| Sweet Chestnut | + | le | EtOH | 256 | − | |
| MeOH | 256 | − | ||||
| *Fraction 224C-F2 | 256 | 256 | ||||
| H2O | − | − | ||||
| gle | EtOH | − | − | |||
| MeOH | 256 | − | ||||
| wp | EtOH | − | − | |||
| MeOH | 128 | − | ||||
| European turkey oak | − | st; fr | EtOH | − | − | |
| le | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Branched centaury | − | le; ro; st; fl | EtOH | − | − | |
| St. John's Wort | + | le; st; fl | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| Walnut | + | le | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| wp | EtOH | 256 | 256 | |||
| MeOH | 128 | 256 | ||||
| imfr | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Jointleaf rush | − | le; fr | EtOH | − | − | |
| Black horehound | + | ro | MeOH | − | − | |
| le | MeOH | − | − | |||
| st | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Horehound | + | ro | MeOH | − | − | |
| le; st; fl | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Spearmint | − | le; st; fl | EtOH | − | − | |
| Rosemary | + | le; st; fl | MeOH | 128 | 256 | |
| Madonna lily | − | infl | EtOH | − | − | |
| Common mallow | + | le | MeOH | − | − | |
| st | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Edible fig | + | le | EtOH | − | − | |
| wp | EtOH | − | − | |||
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| imfr | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Four o'clock flower | − | le; fl; fr | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| Olive | − | wp | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| le | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Boradleaf plantain | + | le; ro; fl; st | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| Couch grass | − | le; st; ro | EtOH | − | − | |
| Giant reed | + | le; st | MeOH | − | − | |
| in | MeOH | − | − | |||
| − | − | le; st; fl; fr | EtOH | − | − | |
| Meadow buttercup | − | le; st; fl | MeOH | − | − | |
| Blackthorn | − | wp; le | EtOH | − | − | |
| fr | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Dog rose | wp | MeOH | − | − | ||
| 80% MeOH | − | − | ||||
| ga | MeOH | − | − | |||
| le | 80% MeOH | − | − | |||
| fr | MeOH | − | − | |||
| le; fl | 80% MeOH | − | − | |||
| Elmleaf blackberry | + | ro | EtOH | − | − | |
| *Fraction 220D-F2 | − | − | ||||
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| wst | EtOH | − | − | |||
| Yellow bedstraw | + | le; st; fl | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| Great mullein | − | le | MeOH | − | − | |
| Field elm | − | wp | EtOH | − | − | |
| MeOH | − | − | ||||
| le | MeOH | − | − | |||
| Grape vine | − | le | MeOH | 64 | 64 | |
| − | + | infl | MeOH | − | − | |
| le | MeOH | 128 | 128 | |||
| Clindamycin | 0.25 | 2 | ||||
| Erythromycin | 0.063 | 2 | ||||
| Resveratrol | 100 | 100 | ||||
Part Extracted.
Figure 1Extracts were screened for percent inhibitory activity against (A) growth and (B) biofilm at a concentration of 256 μg mL−1. Outlier data points were identified using the ROUT method, removed and the data-set reanalyzed for (C) growth and (D) biofilm activity. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001.
Figure 2The most active extracts were examined for mammalian cytotoxicity against an immortalized line of human keratinocytes (HaCaT). Data are reported as percent cytotoxicity and the vehicle (DMSO) was included as a control. Extract numbers correspond as follows: (A) 195: Juglans regia (EtOH extract of woody parts); 246: Asphodelus microcarpus (MeOH extract of leaves). (B) 252: Castanea sativa (MeOH extract of woody parts); and 275: Juglans regia (MeOH extract of woody parts). (C) Extract numbers: 311: Rosmarinus officinalis (MeOH extract of aerial parts: leaves, stems, flowers); 336: Vitis vinifera var. aglianico (MeOH extract of leaves). (D) 357: Vicia sativa subsp. sativa (MeOH extract of aerial parts: leaves, stems, flowers); and 516: Hapalopilus rutilans (MeOH extract of fruiting bodies). Castanea sativa leaf extracts were found to be non-toxic at the tested range and this data is reported in a previous work (Quave et al., 2015).
Chemical characterization of the most bioactive extracts.
| 246 | MeOH extract of leaves | − | + | + | + | − | − | − | − | |
| 134 | EtOH extract of leaves | − | − | − | + | − | + | − | − | |
| 224 | MeOH extract of leaves | − | − | − | + | − | + | − | − | |
| 224C | Ethyl acetate partition of 224 | − | − | − | + | − | + | − | − | |
| 224C−F2 | Flash chromatography fraction of 224C | − | − | − | + | − | + | − | − | |
| 252 | MeOH extract of woody parts | − | − | − | + | − | + | − | − | |
| 516 | MeOH extract of fruiting bodies | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | |
| 195 | EtOH extract of woody parts | − | − | − | + | − | − | − | + | |
| 275 | MeOH extract of woody parts | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | |
| 311 | MeOH extract of aerial parts (leaves, stems, flowers) | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | |
| 357 | MeOH extract of aerial parts (leaves, stems, flowers) | − | − | − | − | − | + | − | + | |
| 336 | MeOH extract of leaves | − | − | + | + | − | + | − | + |
Samples were examined by HPLC and compared to the following standards: caffeic acid (.