| Literature DB >> 28255329 |
Hongshan Li1, Hao Ying2, Airong Hu2, Dezhou Li2, Yaoren Hu2.
Abstract
A growing body of evidence has shown the beneficial effects of salidroside in cardiovascular and metabolic diseases. This study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic effects of salidroside on nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) in rats and explore the underlying mechanisms related to insulin signaling. A rat model of NASH was developed by high-fat diet for 14 weeks. From week 9 onward, the treatment group received oral salidroside (4.33 mg/kg) daily for 6 weeks. Salidroside effectively attenuated steatosis and vacuolation of hepatic tissue, with a dramatic decrease in liver triglycerides and free fatty acid levels (P < 0.01). Dysregulation of FINS, FBG, HOMA-IR, ALT, and AST in serum was ameliorated with salidroside treatment (P < 0.01). In the liver, salidroside induced significant increases in key molecules in the insulin signaling pathway, such as phosphorylated insulin receptor substrate 1 (IRS1), phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K), and protein kinase B (PKB), with a significant decrease in SREBP-1c levels (P < 0.01). Therefore, salidroside effectively protected rats from high-fat-diet-induced NASH, which may be partially attributed to its effects on the hepatic insulin signaling pathway.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28255329 PMCID: PMC5309415 DOI: 10.1155/2017/9651371
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Summary of the primer sequences for PCR analysis.
| Target genes | Sequence (5′ to 3′) |
|---|---|
| IRS1 | Forward: TGGGTGGAGAGAGTATTA |
| Reverse: GTGCTGTGAGGAAAGTTA | |
| PI3K | Forward: GCCTCCATTCACCACCTCT |
| Reverse: CCTCTCCTTCCAAGCCTCA | |
| PKB | Forward: TTGTCCTTTTAGATGCTT |
| Reverse: CGATTTTTATTGACTTTG | |
| SREBP-1c | Forward: TCCTGCACCACCAACTGCTTAG |
| Reverse: AGTGGCAGTGATGGCATGGACT |
Score of fat degeneration of liver samples on H&E staining.
| Groups | Fat degeneration grading | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Control | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 |
| Model | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 8 |
| Salidroside | 0 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 8 |
| Rosiglitazone | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 8 |
| Total | 8 | 1 | 7 | 12 | 4 | 32 |
| Ridit value | 0.1250 | 0.2656 | 0.3906 | 0.6875 | 0.9375 | |
P < 0.01, P < 0.05versus model group.
Figure 1Representative liver hematoxylin and eosin staining images of rats from (a) control group, (b) model group, (c) salidroside group, and (d) rosiglitazone group, respectively. Hepatic cell degeneration was characterized by massive lipid vacuolation and diffusing necrosis. Magnification ×400.
Comparison of hepatic TG and FFA levels (mean ± SEM).
| Groups |
| TG (mg/g) | FFA ( |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 8 | 22.03 ± 4.38 | 139.40 ± 13.69 |
| Model | 8 | 139.48 ± 25.02 | 668.77 ± 69.47 |
| Salidroside | 8 | 88.43 ± 16.04 | 438.27 ± 29.93 |
| Rosiglitazone | 8 | 103.30 ± 19.13 | 409.82 ± 37.29 |
P < 0.01 versus model group.
ALT and AST parameters measured in serum (mean ± SEM).
| Groups |
| AST (U/L) | ALT (U/L) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 8 | 21.20 ± 6.95 | 20.94 ± 7.49 |
| Model | 8 | 52.15 ± 14.10 | 58.55 ± 13.45 |
| Salidroside | 8 | 39.02 ± 9.30 | 43.95 ± 12.31 |
| Rosiglitazone | 8 | 45.33 ± 9.12 | 48.26 ± 8.27 |
P < 0.01, P < 0.05versus model group.
Serum levels of FINS and FBG and the value of HOMA-IR (mean ± SEM).
| Groups |
| FINS (mIU/L) | FBG (mmol/L) | HOMA-IR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 8 | 16.51 ± 3.11 | 2.88 ± 0.27 | 2.10 ± 0.38 |
| Model | 8 | 36.20 ± 5.68 | 5.58 ± 0.21 | 8.96 ± 1.36 |
| Salidroside | 8 | 26.93 ± 4.88 | 4.31 ± 0.65 | 5.18 ± 1.32 |
| Rosiglitazone | 8 | 25.22 ± 2.98 | 4.22 ± 0.59 | 4.74 ± 0.96 |
P < 0.01 versus model group.
Comparison of the mRNA levels of insulin signaling molecules in the liver (mean ± SEM).
| Groups |
| IRS1 | PI3K | PKB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 5 | 1.01 ± 0.13 | 1.02 ± 0.21 | 1.00 ± 0.14 |
| Model | 5 | 0.52 ± 0.10 | 0.53 ± 0.11 | 0.52 ± 0.11 |
| Salidroside | 5 | 0.72 ± 0.12 | 0.75 ± 0.15 | 0.72 ± 0.15 |
| Rosiglitazone | 5 | 0.62 ± 0.13 | 0.62 ± 0.12 | 0.63 ± 0.12 |
P < 0.01, P < 0.05 versus model group.
Comparison of IRS1, pIRS1, PI3K, pPI3K, PKB, and pPKB protein levels in the liver (mean ± SEM, n = 8).
| Groups | IRS1 (pmol/g) | pIRS1 (pmol/g) | PI3K (pmol/g) | pPI3K (pmol/g) | PKB (nmol/g) | pPKB (nmol/g) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 129.34 ± 24.84 | 55.11 ± 8.16 | 481.64 ± 59.49 | 35.51 ± 3.68 | 368.02 ± 38.53 | 161.01 ± 26.72 |
| Model | 66.22 ± 13.00 | 28.21 ± 4.42 | 239.43 ± 44.41 | 16.76 ± 4.21 | 186.41 ± 29.58 | 83.35 ± 16.80 |
| Salidroside | 97.63 ± 13.43 | 38.73 ± 5.22 | 328.04 ± 40.88 | 27.65 ± 3.62 | 280.31 ± 50.28 | 128.85 ± 10.50 |
| Rosiglitazone | 88.12 ± 15.67 | 32.70 ± 5.31 | 271.35 ± 30.33# | 19.82 ± 3.69## | 210.72 ± 40.27## | 93.13 ± 12.62## |
P < 0.01, P < 0.05 versus model group; ##P < 0.01, #P < 0.05 versus salidroside group.
SREBP-1c expression at the mRNA and protein level in the liver (mean ± SEM).
| Groups |
| SREBP-1c mRNA (fold change) |
| SREBP-1c protein (ng/g) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 5 | 1.02 ± 0.23 | 8 | 60.22 ± 7.72 |
| Model | 5 | 3.28 ± 0.35 | 8 | 139.26 ± 17.53 |
| Salidroside | 5 | 2.56 ± 0.31 | 8 | 95.28 ± 7.51 |
| Rosiglitazone | 5 | 2.88 ± 0.36 | 8 | 98.57 ± 9.42 |
P < 0.01 versus model group.