| Literature DB >> 27904813 |
Aifang Li1, Nana Ma1, Zijing Zhao1, Mei Yuan2,3, Hua Li2,3, Qi Wang1,4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Licorice, a popular traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), is widely used to moderate the effects (detoxification) of other herbs in TCM and often combined with Fructus Psoraleae. However, the classical TCM book states that Fructus Psoraleae is incompatible with licorice; the mechanism underlying this incompatibility has not been identified. Glycyrrhetinic acid (GA), the active metabolite of licorice, may increase the toxicity of bakuchiol (BAK), the main chemical ingredient in Psoralea corylifolia, by inhibiting its detoxification enzymes CYP450s.Entities:
Keywords: Bakuchiol; Cytochrome p450; Glycyrrhetinic acid; Nephrotoxicity; Toxicokinetics
Year: 2016 PMID: 27904813 PMCID: PMC5126668 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.2723
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Effects of BAK and GA (100 µM) on HK-2 cell viability (4 h).
| BAK (µM) | HK-2 Cell viability (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| BAK | BAK/HLMs | (BAK + GA)/HLMs | |
| 100.00 ± 7.92 | 100.00 ± 9.59 | 100.00 ± 3.84 | |
| 97.72 ± 10.68 | 103.77 ± 4.32 | 98.92 ± 3.55 | |
| 84.59 ± 13.79 | 104.96 ± 9.39 | 98.72 ± 3.26 | |
| 77.52 ± 4.69 | 100.98 ± 9.76 | 73.85 ± 5.38 | |
| 55.04 ± 11.33 | 109.38 ± 3.19 | 70.68 ± 8.56 | |
| 46.29 ± 12.46 | 92.53 ± 2.07 | 48.91 ± 4.40 | |
Notes.
Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3).
p < 0.01 compared with the same concentration of BAK with HLMs group.
Inhibitory effect of GA on BAK metabolism in HLMs for 30 min.
| GA concentration (µM) | Remaining percentage of BAK (%) | Remaining percentage of GA (%) | Inhibition of BAK by GA (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 63.49 ± 6.05 | – | – | |
| 63.55 ± 8.99 | 99.43 ± 28.88 | −2.45 ± 32.33 | |
| 71.60 ± 6.40 | 99.37 ± 9.39 | 22.72 ± 4.55 | |
| 80.10 ± 6.81 | 100.7 ± 12.33 | 43.85 ± 22.41 | |
| 90.44 ± 15.33 | 98.95 ± 3.80 | 77.87 ± 37.06 | |
| 97.24 ± 1.46 | 107.8 ± 7.54 | 92.00 ± 4.64 |
Notes.
Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3).
p < 0.05.
p < 0.01, compared with the BAK group.
Figure 1Sigma plots of the residual (A) CYP1A2, (B) CYP2C9, (C) CYP2C19, (D) CYP2D6, and (E) CYP3A4 activities vs. the logarithm of the concentration of GA.
The relative activities of CYP isoforms after incubated with various concentration of GA for 30 min in HLMs. Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3).
IC50 of CYP isoforms regulated by GA.
| CYP isoforms | CYP1A2 | CYP2C9 | CYP2C19 | CYP2D6 | CYP3A4 |
| IC50(µmol/L) | 61.06 ± 1.13 | 26.46 ± 3.08 | 175.19 ± 1.26 | 263.01 ± 1.05 | 1.53 ± 2.25 |
Notes.
Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3).
Figure 2The mean plasma concentration–time profiles of BAK in rats after a single oral administration of BAK (200 mg/kg), BAK + ABT (200 + 100 mg/kg) , and BAK + GA (200 + 100 mg/kg).
Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 5).
Toxicokinetic parameters of BAK after a single oral administration.
| Toxicokinetic parameters | BAK | BAK + ABT | BAK + GA |
|---|---|---|---|
| (200 mg/kg) | (200 + 100 mg/kg) | (200 + 100 mg/kg) | |
| AUC0−24 (h µg/L) | 7,264 ± 2,141 | 28,841 ± 8,967 | 11,978 ± 2,450 |
| 4.71 ± 1.56 | 7.20 ± 1.43 | 4.92 ± 1.26 | |
| 887.4 ± 280.6 | 2,416 ± 460.4 | 1,090 ± 397.9 | |
| 3.60 ± 0.89 | 4.80 ± 1.79 | 4.00 ± 0.86 | |
| CL (L/h/kg) | 28.20 ± 7.91 | 6.77 ± 1.86 | 16.50 ± 3.38 |
| MRT (h) | 6.79 ± 0.43 | 8.19 ± 1.01 | 7.63 ± 0.96 |
| V (L/kg) | 184.2 ± 58.6 | 69.53 ± 18.02 | 116.5 ± 35.3 |
Notes.
Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 5).
p < 0.05.
p < 0.01, compared with the BAK group.
Figure 3Effect of GA and ABT on the exposure of the rat liver and kidney to BAK.
Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 5). **p < 0.01, compared with the BAK group.
Figure 4Effects on renal function in rats after a single oral dose.
Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 5). *p < 0.05, compared with the vehicle control; # p < 0.05, compared with the BAK group.