| Literature DB >> 28962312 |
Syed Benazir Firdaus1, Debosree Ghosh1, Aindrila Chattyopadhyay2, Mousumi Dutta1,2, Sudeshna Paul1,2, Jagannath Jana3, Anjali Basu1, Gargi Bose1, Hiya Lahiri1, Bhaswati Banerjee4, Sanjib Pattari5, Subhrangshu Chatterjee3, Kuladip Jana4, Debasish Bandyopadhyay1.
Abstract
Piroxicam (chemically 4-hydroxy-2-methyl-N-2-pyridinyl-2H-1,2-benzothiazine-3-carboxamide), a classical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) is orally administered to arthritic patients. Inhibition of prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) synthesis and subsequent free hydroxyl radical generation in vivo exert gastro-toxic side effects on piroxicam treatment. Leaves of curry plant are rich in antioxidants with prolific free radical scavenging activities. This led us to investigate the efficiency of the use of curry leaves in ameliorating piroxicam induced gastric damage. Piroxicam was orally (30 mg per kg body weight) administered in male albino Wistar rats to generate gastric ulcers. These rats were orally fed with graded doses of aqueous extract of curry or Murraya koenigii leaves (Cu LE) prior to piroxicam administration. Oxidative stress biomarkers, activities of antioxidant and pro-oxidant enzymes, mucin content and nature, PGE2 level, activities of mitochondrial enzymes and histomorphology of gastric tissues were studied. Piroxicam treatment altered all the above mentioned parameters whereas, curry leaf extract pre-treated animals were protected against piroxicam induced alterations. Hence, the protective action of the antioxidant rich Cu LE was investigated to propose a new combination therapy or dietary management to arthritic patients using piroxicam.Entities:
Keywords: Antioxidant; Curry leaves; Gastric ulcer; Gastro-toxicity; Oxidative stress; Piroxicam
Year: 2014 PMID: 28962312 PMCID: PMC5598401 DOI: 10.1016/j.toxrep.2014.06.007
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Toxicol Rep ISSN: 2214-7500
Fig. 1Dose response studies with aqueous curry leaf extract. The rats were fed different doses of Cu LE (ranging from 50 to 300 mg/kg body weight) 1 h before oral administration of piroxicam at 30 mg/kg body weight. (A) Macroscopic view of rat gastric mucosal surface, blue arrow heads are pointing towards pin head ulcer spots. (B) Representative images of H&E stained gastric sections at magnification 400×, black arrow heads are pointing towards regions of mucosal erosion. (C) Bar graphs representing the changes in ulcer index. (D) Representative figure for changes in lipid peroxidation level. (E) Representative figure for changes in reduced glutathione content. All values in (C)–(E) are expressed as mean ± S.E.M. where *P ≤ 0.001 vs. control, **P ≤ 0.001 vs. piroxicam treated animals (one-way ANOVA followed by Scheffe’ multiple comparison test).
Fig. 2Dose dependent effects of aqueous curry leaf extract on activities of antioxidant (A–C) and pro-oxidant enzymes (D and E) in rat stomach. The rats were fed different doses of Cu LE (ranging from 50 to 300 mg/kg body weight) 1 h before oral administration of piroxicam at 30 mg/kg body weight. (A) The gastric peroxidase activity. (B) The Cu–Zn superoxide dismutase (SOD1) activity. (D) The catalase activity. (D) The xanthine oxidase activity. (E) The xanthine dehydrogenase activity. Bar graphs represent the values of activity levels of different enzymes and all the values are expressed as mean ± S.E.M. where *P ≤ 0.001 vs. control, **P ≤ 0.001 vs. piroxicam treated animals (one-way ANOVA followed by Scheffe’ multiple comparison test).
Fig. 3Protective effective of 200 mg/kg body weight dose of aqueous curry leaf extract in piroxicam-fed rat stomach. (A) Macroscopic view of rat gastric mucosal surface, blue arrow heads are pointing towards pin head ulcer spots. (B) The bar graph representing changes in ulcer index values. (C) Upper panel showing photomicrographs of H&E stained gastric sections, middle panel consisting of PAS stained sections and lower panel represents alcian blue dye stained sections; captured as viewed under inverted phase contrast microscope at magnification 200×, black arrow heads are pointing towards regions of mucosal erosion. (D) Bar graph showing changes in free neutral mucin content. All values in (B) and (D) are expressed as mean ± S.E.M. where *P ≤ 0.001 vs. control, **P ≤ 0.001 vs. piroxicam treated animals (one-way ANOVA followed by Scheffe’ multiple comparison test).
Level of lipid peroxidation, protein carbonyl, total sulfhydryl, reduced glutathione and oxidized glutathione content in rat stomach.
| Parameters | Animal groups (Values expressed as mean ± S.E.M.) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control (C) | Aqueous curry leaf extract treated (Cu LE200) | Piroxicam treated (Px) | Aqueous curry leaf extract pre-treated + piroxicam treated (CuLE200 + Px) | |
| LPO (nmoles TBARS/mg protein) | 0.61 ± 0.03 | 0.57 ± 0.02 | 1.32 ± 0.06 | 0.65 ± 0.02 |
| PCO (nmoles carbonyl/mg protein) | 2.65 ± 0.29 | 2.61 ± 0.29 | 14.7 ± 0.31 | 2.76 ± 0.26 |
| Total sulfhydryl content (nmol TSH/mg of tissue protein) | 44.3 ± 0.99 | 44.5 ± 0.98 | 18.1 ± 0.56 | 45.1 ± 0.67 |
| Reduced glutathione content (nmol of GSH/mg of tissue protein) | 24.1 ± 0.88 | 24.3 ± 1.06 | 8.96 ± 0.34 | 22.1 ± 0.67 |
| Oxidized glutathione content (nmol of GSSG/mg of tissue protein) | 0.39 ± 0.02 | 0.41 ± 0.01 | 0.98 ± 0.06 | 0.41 ± 0.03 |
P ≤ 0.001 compared to control values using ANOVA.
P ≤ 0.001 compared to piroxicam treated values using ANOVA.
Alterations in the activities of key antioxidant enzymes in rat gastric tissue.
| Antioxidant enzymes (units of activity) | Animal groups (values of different antioxidant enzymes’ activities expressed as mean ± S.E.M) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control (C) | Aqueous curry leaf extract treated (Cu LE200) | Piroxicam treated (Px) | Aqueous curry leaf extract pre-treated + piroxicam treated (Cu LE200 + Px) | |
| Gastric peroxidase (units/min/mg of tissue protein) | 74.41 ± 1.71 | 74.98 ± 1.33 | 36.32 ± 1.11 | 64.55 ± 1.21 |
| Glutathione peroxidase (nmol of NADPH produced/min/mg of tissue protein) | 0.28 ± 0.01 | 0.27 ± 0.01 | 0.65 ± 0.02 | 0.31 ± 0.01 |
| Catalase (μmol of H2O2 consumed/min/mg of tissue protein) | 10.52 ± 0.52 | 10.57 ± 0.62 | 18.75 ± 0.52 | 11.23 ± 0.69 |
| Cu–Zn superoxide dismutase (units/min/mg of tissue protein) | 2.16 ± 0.21 | 2.05 ± 0.24 | 5.67 ± 0.24 | 2.44 ± 0.27 |
| Mn superoxide dismutase (units/min/mg of tissue protein) | 1.32 ± 0.12 | 1.37 ± 0.08 | 3.19 ± 0.21 | 1.56 ± 0.19 |
| Glutathione-S-transferase activity (units/min/mg of tissue protein) | 0.72 ± 0.02 | 0.72 ± 0.03 | 0.35 ± 0.03 | 0.63 ± 0.02 |
| Glutathione reductase activity (units/min/mg of tissue protein) | 0.29 ± 0.01 | 0.30 ± 0.01 | 0.57 ± 0.02 | 0.34 ± 0.01 |
P ≤ 0.001 compared to control values using ANOVA.
P ≤ 0.001 compared to piroxicam treated values using ANOVA.
Fig. 4Protective mechanism of aqueous curry leaf extract at 200 mg/kg body weight dose against piroxicam induced oxidative stress in rat stomach. (A) The serum PGE level. (B) The gastric tissue PGE level. (C) The gastric tissue free hydroxyl radical level. (D) Xanthine oxidase activity. (E) Xanthine dehydrogenase activity. The bar graphs represent the values of the different parameters studied and all the values are expressed as mean ± S.E.M. where *P ≤ 0.001 vs. control, **P ≤ 0.001 vs. piroxicam treated animals (one-way ANOVA followed by Scheffe’ multiple comparison test).
Fig. 5Protective action of aqueous curry leaf extract at 200 mg/kg body weight on piroxicam induced altered activities of mitochondrial Kreb's cycle (A–D) and electron transport chain enzymes (E and F). (A) The pyruvate dehydrogenase activity. (B) The isocitrate dehydrogenase activity. (C) The alpha-ketoglutarate dehydrogenase activity. (D) The succinate dehydrogenase activity. (E) The NADH-cytochrome c oxido-reductase activity. (F) The cytochrome c oxidase activity. Bar graphs represent the values of activity levels of the enzymes and all the values are expressed as mean ± S.E.M. where *P ≤ 0.001 vs. control, **P ≤ 0.001 vs. piroxicam treated animals (one-way ANOVA followed by Scheffe’ multiple comparison test).
Fig. 6Protective effective of 200 mg/kg body weight dose of aqueous curry leaf extract in piroxicam-fed rat stomach. (A) The photomicrographs of picro-sirius red stained sections. (B) Representative figures of confocal images of picro-sirius red stained sections. (C) The bar graph showing changes in gastric tissue collagen volume. (D) The representative figure for determining pro-MMP 9 activity through gelatin zymography. (E) The bar graph representing arbitrary activity values of pro-MMP 9. All values in (C) and (E) are expressed as mean ± S.E.M. where *P ≤ 0.001 vs. control, **P ≤ 0.001 vs. piroxicam treated animals (one-way ANOVA followed by Scheffe’ multiple comparison test).
Extraction yield and phytochemical composition of aqueous curry leaf extract (Cu LE).
| Samples | Extraction yield | Phytochemical content | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total phenols (mg GAE | Total flavonoid (mg CE | Chlorophyll content (mg/g Cu LE) | Alkaloid content (mg BN | Total tannin (mg TAE | ||
| Curry ( | 14.72 ± 0.36 | 57.5 ± 0.05 | 5.2 ± 0.21 | 0.32 ± 0.006 | 38.6 ± 0.14 | 0.118 ± 0.006 |
Values represent the means of three replicates ± S.E.M.
Extraction yield (%) = (sample extract weight/sample weight) × 100.
GAE, gallic acid equivalent.
CE, catechin equivalent.
TAE, tannic acid equivalent.
BN, bismuth nitrate.
Fig. 7(A) The representative figure for gas chromatogram of the extract. (B) The representative figures for the mass spectrometry. Upper panel shows the mass spectrometric data of the chromatographic peaks obtained at 6.341 min, 7.245 min and 8.905 min. Lower panel shows the mass spectrometric data of the chromatographic peaks obtained at peak at 9.797 min and 14.815 min.
Fig. 8The possible mechanism of protection by Cu LE against piroxicam-induced oxidative stress mediated gastric ulcer.