| Literature DB >> 33109189 |
Biting Wang1, Zengrui Wu2, Jiye Wang1, Weihua Li1, Guixia Liu1, Bo Zhang3, Yun Tang4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Arnebia euchroma (A. euchroma) is a traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) used for the treatment of blood diseases including leukemia. In recent years, many studies have been conducted on the anti-tumor effect of shikonin and its derivatives, the major active components of A. euchroma. However, the underlying mechanism of action (MoA) for all the components of A. euchroma on leukemia has not been explored systematically.Entities:
Keywords: Arnebia euchroma; Concentration; Leukemia; Network pharmacology; Traditional Chinese medicine; Weighted network
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33109189 PMCID: PMC7590697 DOI: 10.1186/s12906-020-03106-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Med Ther ISSN: 2662-7671
Fig. 1Workflow for A. euchroma on leukemia
Fig. 2Construction of A. euchroma-leukemia PPI network. a A. euchroma PPI network (PPIA); b Leukemia PPI network (PPIL); c A. euchroma-leukemia PPI network; d Targets of A. euchroma that meet the screening criteria
Fig. 3Weighted compound-target bipartite network. Pink circle nodes represent potential targets, hexagon nodes remark components and each edge represent the interaction between them. Orange hexagon nodes represent Class I components, which have the highest concentration; green hexagon nodes remark Class II components, which have a lower concentration; gray hexagon nodes remark Class III components, which have without concentration data. Silver edges represent predicted CTIs and black edges remark known CTIs
Fig. 4KEGG pathway analysis. a the score of 9 selected KEGG pathways. 9 pathways were divided into three categories, including four cell survival and death pathways (orange), two immune system pathways (cyan), three endocrine system pathways (green); b the selected 9 KEGG pathway-target interaction
Fig. 5The interactive modes of 2 targets and the corresponding 8 compounds. a arnebinone to TNF (docking score = − 6.222); b arnebiabinone to TNF (docking score = − 5.658); c dehydroalkannin to TNF (docking score = − 5.405); d oleanolic acid to TNF (docking score = − 4.875); e shinjulactone k to TNF (docking score = − 4.875); f ursolic acid to TNF (docking score = − 4.789); g shikonofuran b to HIF1A (docking score = − 4.802); h o9-angeloylretronecine to HIF1A (docking score = − 4.488)
Fig. 6Critical compound-target bipartite network. Pink circle nodes represent critical targets, hexagon nodes remark components and each edge represent the interaction between them. Orange nodes represent naphthoquinones; green nodes remark monoterpene phenol and benzoquinones; cyan nodes remark alkaloids; purple nodes represent steroids; brown nodes remark organic acids; blue nodes represent triterpenoids. Silver edges represent predicted CTIs and black edges remark known CTIs