| Literature DB >> 31061679 |
Daniela Fernandes Roxo1, Carlos Alberto Arcaro1, Vania Ortega Gutierres1, Mariana Campos Costa1, Juliana Oriel Oliveira1, Tayra Ferreira Oliveira Lima1, Renata Pires Assis1,2, Iguatemy Lourenço Brunetti1, Amanda Martins Baviera1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Combination of current antidiabetic agents with natural antioxidants to manage diabetes mellitus and its complications has appeared as an emerging trend. Curcumin, a yellow pigment isolated from Curcuma longa rhizomes, has gained attention due to its beneficial effects in controlling the disturbances observed in diabetes mellitus. The purpose of this study was to investigate if yoghurt enriched with curcumin and metformin, individually or as mixtures, ameliorates physiometabolic parameters, glycoxidative stress biomarkers, and paraoxonase 1 (PON 1) activity in diabetic rats.Entities:
Keywords: Curcumin; Diabetes mellitus; Glycoxidative stress; Paraoxonase
Year: 2019 PMID: 31061679 PMCID: PMC6492331 DOI: 10.1186/s13098-019-0431-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diabetol Metab Syndr ISSN: 1758-5996 Impact factor: 3.320
Fig. 1Biochemical and oxidative stress biomarkers of STZ-diabetic rats treated with curcumin alone or combined with metformin. Plasma levels of glucose (A), triacylglycerol (B), cholesterol (C), TBARS (D), fluorescent AGEs (E), and PON 1 activity (F). Values are expressed as mean ± SEM, n = 10. NYOG: normal rats treated with yoghurt; DYOG: diabetic rats treated with yoghurt; DINS: diabetic rats treated with 4 U/day insulin; DC90: diabetic rats treated with 90 mg/kg curcumin in yoghurt; DM250: diabetic rats treated with 250 mg/kg metformin in yoghurt; DC90M250: diabetic rats treated with 90 mg/kg curcumin + 250 mg/kg metformin in yoghurt. The differences between groups were considered significant at p < 0.05 and were analyzed using one-way ANOVA followed by Student–Newman–Keuls test. aDifferences with NYOG; bdifferences with DYOG; cdifferences with DINS; ddifferences with DC90; edifferences with DM250; fdifferences with DC90DM250
Physiological parameters of STZ-diabetic rats treated with curcumin alone or combined with metformin
| Groups | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NYOG | DYOG | DINS | DC90 | DM250 | DC90M250 | |||||||
| Day 0 | Day 30 | Day 0 | Day 30 | Day 0 | Day 30 | Day 0 | Day 30 | Day 0 | Day 30 | Day 0 | Day 30 | |
| Body weight (g) | 175.80 ± 9.34 | 332.60 ± 18.82# | 173.91 ± 3.83 | 237.08 ± 19.65a,# | 175.38 ± 4.86 | 323.13 ± 6.58b,# | 172.07 ± 2.79 | 268.42 ± 7.90a,c,# | 171.06 ± 7.53 | 267.13 ± 8.97a,c,# | 173.50 ± 5.08 | 298.53 ± 9.19b,# |
| Food intake (g/24 h) | 20.42 ± 1.59 | 20.25 ± 2.71 | 26.31 ± 2.12 | 41.75 ± 2.06a,# | 26.83 ± 1.57 | 22.79 ± 1.05b | 26.33 ± 1.99 | 33.21 ± 4.43a,# | 26.75 ± 1.44 | 32.64 ± 3.69a,# | 26.50 ± 1.68 | 28.00 ± 4.11b |
| Water intake (mL/24 h) | 30.17 ± 2.76 | 26.08 ± 2.28 | 89.20 ± 12.14 | 188.33 ± 13.12a,# | 85.21 ± 13.40 | 25.78 ± 2.61b,# | 85.14 ± 7.20 | 125.67 ± 25.18a,b,c,# | 86.29 ± 6.73 | 89.22 ± 5.40a,b,c | 81.25 ± 7.21 | 85.31 ± 8.97a,b,c |
| Urinary volume (mL/24 h) | 5.42 ± 0.29 | 16.50 ± 1.31# | 62.80 ± 10.17 | 165.17 ± 11.55a,# | 66.40 ± 9.37 | 18.50 ± 3.57b,# | 61.86 ± 6.34 | 122.67 ± 16.28a,b,c,# | 63.04 ± 8.67 | 80.00 ± 11.57a,b,c | 61.50 ± 10.11 | 80.60 ± 10.45a,b,c |
| Glycosuria (g/24 h) | nd | nd | 1.92 ± 0.53 | 11.06 ± 0.78# | 2.52 ± 0.64 | 0.19 ± 0.041b,# | 2.58 ± 0.78 | 2.82 ± 0.67b,c | 2.21 ± 0.12 | 2.78 ± 0.13b,c | 2.31 ± 0.13 | 2.78 ± 0.19b,c |
Values are expressed as mean ± SEM, n = 10
The differences between groups were considered significant at p < 0.05 and were analyzed using one-way ANOVA followed by Student–Newman–Keuls test
nd, not determined; NYOG, normal rats treated with yoghurt; DYOG, diabetic rats treated with yoghurt; DINS, diabetic rats treated with 4 U/day insulin; DC90, diabetic rats treated with 90 mg/kg curcumin in yoghurt; DM250, diabetic rats treated with 250 mg/kg metformin in yoghurt; DC90M250, diabetic rats treated with 90 mg/kg curcumin + 250 mg/kg metformin in yoghurt
aDifferences with NYOG; b differences with DYOG; c differences with DINS. Differences compared in the same group relative to day 0 were analyzed using the paired Student’s t-test. # Differences with day 0 (p < 0.05)