| Literature DB >> 33041827 |
Tengwen Liu1, Yuhong Guo2,3, Jingxia Zhao2,3, Shasha He2,3, Yunjing Bai2,3, Ning Wang2,3, Yan Lin2,3, Qingquan Liu2,3, Xiaolong Xu2,3.
Abstract
The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected millions of people worldwide. Critically ill COVID-19 patients develop viral septic syndrome, including inflammatory damage, immune dysfunction, and coagulation disorder. In this study, we investigated ShenFuHuang formula (SFH), a traditional Chinese medicine, which has been widely used as complementary therapy for clinical treatment of COVID-19 in Wuhan, to understand its pharmacological properties. Results of systems pharmacology identified 49 active compounds of SFH and their 69 potential targets, including GSK3β, ESR1, PPARG, PTGS2, AKR1B10, and MAPK14. Network analysis illustrated that the targets of SFH may be involved in viral disease, bacterial infection/mycosis, and metabolic disease. Moreover, signaling pathway analysis showed that Toll-like receptors, MAPK, PPAR, VEGF, NOD-like receptor, and NF-kappa B signaling pathways are highly connected with the potential targets of SFH. We further employed multiple zebrafish models to confirm the pharmacological effects of SFH. Results showed that SFH treatment significantly inhibited the inflammatory damage by reducing the generation of neutrophils in Poly (I:C)-induced viral infection model. Moreover, SFH treatment could improve the phagocytosis of macrophages and enhance the expression of immune genes in an immune deficiency model. Furthermore, SFH treatment exhibited promising anti-thrombosis effect in a thrombus model. This study provided additional evidence of SFH formula for treating COVID-19 patients with septic syndrome using multiple-scale estimation.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; sepsis; systems pharmacology; traditional Chinese medicine; zebrafish
Year: 2020 PMID: 33041827 PMCID: PMC7523021 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2020.584057
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pharmacol ISSN: 1663-9812 Impact factor: 5.810
Candidate Information.
| Molecular ID | Compound | Herb | OB | Caco2 | DL | HL | Structure |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M1 | beta-sitosterol |
| 36.91 | 1.32 | 0.75 | 5.35 |
|
| M2 | sitosterol |
| 36.91 | 1.32 | 0.75 | 5.37 |
|
| M3 | aloe-emodin |
| 83.38 | -0.12 | 0.24 | 31.5 |
|
| M4 | emodin |
| 24.40 | 0.22 | 0.24 | 0 |
|
| M5 | chrysophanol |
| 18.64 | 0.62 | 0.21 | 0 |
|
| M6 | dioctyl phthalate |
| 40.58 | 0.95 | 0.40 | 9.73 |
|
| M7 | 11,14-eicosadienoic acid |
| 39.99 | 1.22 | 0.20 | 5.60 |
|
| M8 | eupatin |
| 50.80 | 0.53 | 0.41 | 13.9 |
|
| M9 | chrysophanol glucoside |
| 20.06 | -1.17 | 0.76 | 0 |
|
| M10 | rhein |
| 47.07 | -0.20 | 0.28 | 32.1 |
|
| M11 | daucosterol_qt |
| 35.89 | 1.35 | 0.70 | 6.11 |
|
| M12 | Deltoin |
| 46.69 | 0.55 | 0.37 | 7.69 |
|
| M13 | karanjin |
| 69.56 | 1.22 | 0.34 | 13.1 |
|
| M14 | fuzitine |
| 25.78 | 1.02 | 0.54 | 0 |
|
| M15 | carnosifloside I_qt |
| 38.15 | 0.28 | 0.79 | 6.99 |
|
| M16 | ginsenoside rh2 |
| 36.32 | -0.50 | 0.56 | 11.07 |
|
| M17 | ginsenoside rf |
| 17.74 | -2.23 | 0.24 | 0 |
|
| M18 | ginsenoside R0_qt |
| 17.41 | 0.43 | 0.76 | 0 |
|
| M19 | mesaconitine |
| 8.70 | -0.35 | 0.25 | 0 |
|
| M20 | (6Z,10E,14E,18E)-2,6,10,15,19,23-hexamethyltetracosa-2,6,10,14,18,22-hexaene |
| 33.55 | 2.07 | 0.42 | 3.14 |
|
| M21 | ginsenoside-Rh1 |
| 3.86 | -1.17 | 0.57 | 0 |
|
| M22 | 20(R)-ginsenoside Rg2 |
| 10.09 | -1.96 | 0.26 | 0 |
|
| M23 | ginsenoside Rb1 |
| 6.24 | -3.99 | 0.04 | 0 |
|
| M24 | ginsenoside-Rb2 |
| 6.02 | -3.92 | 0.04 | 0 |
|
| M25 | ginsenoside-Rc |
| 8.16 | -3.97 | 0.04 | 0 |
|
| M26 | ginsenoside Re |
| 4.27 | -3.20 | 0.12 | 0 |
|
| M27 | notoginsenoside R2 |
| 17.74 | -2.22 | 0.28 | 0 |
|
| M28 | ginsenoside Rg2_qt |
| 20.12 | 0.05 | 0.82 | 0 |
|
| M29 | ginsenoside Rg2_qt |
| 20.12 | 0.05 | 0.82 | 0 |
|
| M30 | ginsenoside Rg3_qt |
| 29.70 | 0.34 | 0.77 | 0 |
|
| M31 | ginsenosideRh4_qt |
| 9.84 | 0.36 | 0.78 | 0 |
|
| M32 | ginsenoside Rs1_qt |
| 11.87 | -0.86 | 0.46 | 0 |
|
| M33 | hypaconitine |
| 31.39 | -0.34 | 0.26 | 19.87 |
|
| M34 | Benzoylmesaconine |
| 8.55 | -0.52 | 0.27 | 0 |
|
| M35 | karakoline |
| 51.73 | 0.32 | 0.73 | 11.10 |
|
| M36 | neojiangyouaconitine |
| 9.83 | 0.01 | 0.26 | 0 |
|
| M37 | benzoylhypaconine |
| 8.70 | -0.29 | 0.29 | 0 |
|
| M38 | benzoylnapelline |
| 34.05 | 0.19 | 0.52 | 15.7 |
|
| M39 | 6-demethyldesoline |
| 51.87 | -0.26 | 65 | 13.1 |
|
| M40 | deoxyaconitine |
| 30.95 | -0.23 | 0.24 | 22.6 |
|
| M41 | ignavine |
| 84.07 | -0.07 | 0.24 | 28.9 |
|
| M42 | isotalatizidine |
| 50.82 | -0.11 | 0.73 | 11.5 |
|
| M43 | aconitine |
| 7.87 | -0.58 | 0.23 | 0 |
|
| M44 | mutatochrome |
| 48.64 | 1.97 | 0.61 | 15.7 |
|
| M45 | rheinoside A |
| 0.82 | -3.17 | 0.68 | 0 |
|
| M46 | sennoside C |
| 3.99 | -3.53 | 0.08 | 0 |
|
| M47 | rheosmin |
| 26.79 | 0.97 | 0.04 | 0 |
|
| M48 | aloeemodin |
| 20.65 | -0.22 | 0.24 | 0 |
|
| M49 | palmidin A |
| 32.45 | -0.36 | 0.65 | 32.1 |
|
Figure 1Compound-target-disease-pathway networks. (A) Compound-target network of SFH consisting of 113 nodes and 291 interactions. (B) Target-disease network including 46 candidate targets and 5 important diseases. (C) Target-pathway network including 45 candidate targets and 46 KEGG pathways.
Figure 2Integration of networks of SFH targets. Sepsis-related pathway including calcium signaling pathway, MAPK signaling pathway, T cell receptor signaling pathway, and PI3K-AKT signaling pathway.
Figure 3Identification of major components of SFH formula. Three parallel samples of SFH formula were detected by employing the UPLC–MS/MS system. Data were collected and proceeded by software Masslynx 4.1. The positive (A) and negative (B) ion chromatograms of SFH formula were shown as indicated.
Figure 4Effect of SFH on Poly (I:C)-induced pneumonia. (A) HE staining to observe the pathological features. Arrows mark the inflammatory infiltration and cell shedding. (B) Fluorescence detection on neutrophils. (C) The numbers of neutrophils in air bladder tissue are counted. For all experiments, at least 30 larvae were used for each condition. ** indicated significant difference at p < 0.01, *** indicated significant difference at p < 0.001, compared with Poly (I:C) group.
Figure 5Effect of SFH on macrophage activation. (A) Observation of macrophages with or without ink under dissecting microscope. (B) The numbers of macrophages with ink are counted. For all experiments, at least 30 larvae were used for each condition. *** indicated significant difference at p < 0.001, compared with ink group. (C) RT-PCR detection on the mRNA expression of M1/M2 markers in macrophage. For all experiments, at least 30 larvae were used for each condition. * indicated significant difference at p < 0.05, ** indicated significant difference at p < 0.01, *** indicated significant difference at p < 0.001, compared with ink group.
Figure 6Effect of SFH on coagulation function. (A) Observation of RBC in the heart and trunk of zebrafish under dissecting microscope. (B) Detection of staining intensity of RBC in the heart of zebrafish using dissecting microscope. For all experiments, at least 30 larvae were used for each condition. *** indicated significant difference at p < 0.001, compared with AA group. (C) Evaluation of the antithrombosis effect of SFH. For all experiments, at least 30 larvae were used for each condition. *** indicated significant difference at p < 0.001, compared with AA group.