| Literature DB >> 34203991 |
Rania M Kamal1, Manal M Sabry1, Zeinab Y Aly2, Mohamed S Hifnawy1.
Abstract
Unlike other widely known Aloe species used for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, this species suffers from a lack of sufficient studies on its biological and chemical characters. This is what drove us to perform this work to evaluate the in vivo anti-arthritic potential of its leaf ethanolic extract. The in vivo anti-arthritic activity of the leaf ethanolic extract at 100 and 200 mg/kg/day b.wt. was evaluated alone and in combination with methotrexate (MTX) using complete Freund's adjuvant. Serum levels of rheumatoid factor, anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP), cytokines pro-inflammatory marker, inflammatory mediator serum levels, and oxidative stress mediators were analyzed, in addition to liver function. Orientin, isoorientin, β-sitosterol, its palmitate and its glucoside were isolated. The combined therapy of MTX and the leaf ethanolic extract (especially at 200 mg/kg b.wt.) group showed better activity compared to MTX alone. Moreover, the combined therapy provided additional benefits in lowering the liver toxicity by comparison to MTX alone. We concluded that a synergetic combination of the leaf ethanolic extract and MTX is beneficial in the management of rheumatoid arthritis with fewer side effects on liver function, as well as the possibility of the leaf extract to stand alone as an effective natural anti-arthritic agent.Entities:
Keywords: Aloe thraskii; anti-arthritic; combined methotrexate therapy; complete Freund’s adjuvant; phytochemical
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34203991 PMCID: PMC8232661 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26123660
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Structures of compounds separated from Aloe thraskii Baker leaves.
Effect of different treatments on the levels of diagnostic markers of rheumatoid arthritis (RF and anti-CCP).
| Group | RF, Percent * | Anti-CCP, Percent * |
|---|---|---|
| Normal control | 21.6 ± 0.67 a | 7.74 ± 0.36 a |
| Negative control | 78.4 ± 2.27 e, 263.45% (↑) | 43.1 ± 1.45 f, 456.54% (↑) |
| MTX treated group | 46.8 ± 2.31 c, 40.3% (↓) | 22.6 ± 0.75 c, 47.6% (↓) |
| Ethanolic extract (100 mg/kg b.wt) | 84.4 ± 2.22 e, 7.7% (↓) | 36.4 ± 2.91 e, 15.6% (↓) |
| Ethanolic extract (200 mg/kg b.wt) | 67.1 ± 3.11 d, 14.4% (↓) | 29.6 ± 3.05 d, 31.4% (↓) |
| MTX + ethanolic extract (100 mg/kg b.wt) | 41.5 ± 2.40 b, 47% (↓) | 20.4 ± 0.95 c, 52.6% (↓) |
| MTX + ethanolic extract (200 mg/kg b.wt) | 37.6 ± 2.15 bc, 52% (↓) | 15.3 ± 0.52 b, 64.6% (↓) |
RF, rheumatoid factor (mIU/mL); anti-CCP, anticyclic citrullinated peptide (IU/mL). * percentage increase or inhibition. Values are expressed as mean ± SE (n = 6 rats). In the same column, the presence of different letters (a–f) indicating a significant difference between groups using ANOVA in SPSS software (at p < 0.05), the letter “a” is the nearest result to the control while letter ”f” is the furthest from the control group.
Effect of different treatments on the levels of markers of inflammation (NF-ĸB, TNF-α and IL-10).
| Group | Proinflammatory Markers | Inflammatory Mediator | |
|---|---|---|---|
| NF-ĸB, Percent * | TNF-α, Percent * | IL10, Percent * | |
| Normal control | 4.56 ± 0.18 a | 36.9 ± 1.33 a | 98.6 ± 2.31 e |
| Negative control | 21.2 ± 0.65 e, (364.38% ↑) | 173.2 ± 3.23 e, (370% ↑) | 54.6 ± 1.85 a, (44.69% ↓) |
| MTX treated group | 8.65 ± 0.50 b, (59.2% ↓) | 93.4 ± 3.86 c, (46.1%↑) | 89.6 ± 2.09 d, (64.2% ↑) |
| Ethanolic extract (100 mg/kg b.wt) | 19.2 ± 1.09 d, (9.2% ↓) | 135.7 ± 3.81 d, (21.6% ↓) | 63.4 ± 2.46 b, (16.3% ↑) |
| Ethanolic extract (200 mg/kg b.wt) | 13.8 ± 0.59 c, (35% ↓) | 91.6 ± 3.83 c, (47.1% ↓) | 75.1 ± 3.31 c, (37.7% ↑) |
| MTX + ethanolic extract (100 mg/kg b.wt) | 8.29 ± 0.38 b, (60.9% ↓) | 83.5 ± 4.54 c, (51.8% ↓) | 95.8 ± 3.42 d,e, (75.7%↑) |
| MTX + ethanolic extract (200 mg/kg b.wt) | 7.66 ± 0.45 b, (63.69% ↓) | 69.4 ± 4.56 b, (59.9% ↓) | 99.3 ± 3.99 e, (82% ↑) |
NF-ĸB, nuclear factor kappa b (pg/mL); TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor (pg/mL); and IL-10, interleukin-10 (pg/mL). * Percentage increase or inhibition. Values are expressed as mean ± SE (n = 6 rats). In the same column, the presence of different letters (a–f) indicating a significant difference between groups using ANOVA in SPSS software (at p < 0.05), the letter “a” is the nearest result to the control while letter ”f” is the furthest from the control group.
Effect of different treatments on levels of markers of oxidative stress (TAC, GSH and MDA).
| Groups | TAC, Percent * | GSH, Percent * | MDA, Percent * |
|---|---|---|---|
| Normal control | 0.459 ± 0.023 e | 49.7 ± 1.64 e | 13.4 ± 0.57 a |
| Negative control | 0.379 ± 0.018 c,d, 17.3% (↓) | 39.1 ± 1.68 c, 21.4% (↓) | 24.4 ± 0.92 c, 22.7% (↑) |
| MTX treated group | 0.251 ± 0.011 a, 33.8% (↓) | 24.3 ± 1.98 a, 39.9% (↓) | 32.6 ± 1.39 e, 33.7% (↑) |
| Ethanolic extract (100 mg/kg b.wt) | 0.416 ± 0.021 d,e, 9.8% (↑) | 43.5 ± 1.95 c,d, 11.3% (↑) | 19.6 ± 1.17 b, 19.8% (↓) |
| Ethanolic extract (200 mg/kg b.wt) | 0.436 ± 0.016 e, 15% (↑) | 47.3 ± 2.15 d,e, 21.1% (↑) | 14.8 ± 0.71 a, 39.5% (↓) |
| MTX + ethanolic extract (100 mg/kg b.wt) | 0.289 ± 0.011 a,b, 23.8% (↓) | 28.1 ± 1.26 a,b, 28% (↓) | 30.1 ± 1.31 d,e, 23.2% (↑) |
| MTX + ethanolic extract (200 mg/Kg b.wt) | 0.335 ± 0.012 b,c, 11.8% (↓) | 31.9 ± 1.87 b, 18% (↓) | 28.2 ± 1.80 d, 15.5% (↑) |
TAC, total antioxidant capacity (nmol/L); GSH, glutathione reduced (mg/dL); and MDA, malondialdehyde (nmol/mL). * percentage increase or inhibition. Values are expressed as mean ± SE (n = 6 rats). In the same column, the presence of different letters (a–f) indicating a significant difference between groups using ANOVA in SPSS software (at p < 0.05), the letter “a” is the nearest result to the control while letter ”f” is the furthest from the control group.
Effect of different treatments on the markers of liver function (AST, ALT and ALP).
| Group | AST, Percent * | ALT, Percent * | ALP, Percent * |
|---|---|---|---|
| Normal control | 22.7 ± 1.28 a | 48.8 ± 1.35 a | 141.3 ± 6.75 a |
| Negative control | 50.8 ± 3.05 d, 122% (↑) | 116 ± 3.27 d, 137.5% (↑) | 232.9 ± 10.5 c, 64.8% (↑) |
| MTX treated group | 66.3 ± 2.52 f, 31.1% (↑) | 159.8 ± 6.58 g, 37.8% (↑) | 378.3 ± 8.85 f, 62.4% (↑) |
| Ethanolic extract (100 mg/Kg b.wt) | 40.3 ± 1.33 c, 19.9% (↓) | 101.5 ± 3.22 c,12.5% (↓) | 176.8 ± 5.92 b, 24.1% (↓) |
| Ethanolic extract (200 mg/Kg b.wt) | 29.8 ± 1.17 b, 40.7% (↓) | 74.2 ± 2.41 b, 36.1% (↓) | 156.6 ± 3.98 a,b, 32.8% (↓) |
| MTX + ethanolic extract (100 mg/Kg b.wt) | 62.3 ± 2.96 e,f, 23.8% (↑) | 145.7 ± 3.80 f, 25.6% (↑) | 328.6 ± 7.33 e, 41.1% (↑) |
| MTX + ethanolic extract (200 mg/Kg b.wt) | 56.7 ± 1.94 e, 12.6% (↑) | 131 ± 5.7 e, 12.6% (↑) | 274.1 ± 13.2 d, 17.1% (↑) |
AST, aspartate amino transferase (U/mL); ALT, alanine transaminase (U/mL); and ALP, alkaline phosphatase (U/L).* percentage increase or inhibition. Values are expressed as mean ± SE (n = 6 rats). In the same column, the presence of different letters (a–f) indicating a significant difference between groups using ANOVA in SPSS software (at p < 0.05), the letter “a” is the nearest result to the control while letter ”f” is the furthest from the control group.
Effect of different treatments on total bilirubin and total protein.
| Groups | Total Bilirubin, Percent * | Total Protein, Percent * |
|---|---|---|
| Normal control | 0.72 ± 0.03 a | 6.18 ± 0.25 d |
| Negative control | 1.31 ± 0.06 c, 80.7% (↑) | 4.78 ± 0.16 b,c, 22.7% (↓) |
| MTX treated group | 2.06 ± 0.07 f, 58.9% (↑) | 3.92 ± 0.11 a, 18% (↓) |
| Ethanolic extract (100 mg/Kg b.wt) | 1.05 ± 0.04 b, 19% (↓) | 5.08 ± 0.28 c, 6.2% (↑) |
| Ethanolic extract (200 mg/Kg b.wt) | 0.91 ± 0.037 b, 31% (↓) | 5.83 ± 0.22 d, 22% (↑) |
| MTX + ethanolic extract (100 mg/Kg b.wt) | 1.91 ± 0.06 e, 43.1% (↑) | 4.24 ± 0.18 b,c, 11.3% (↓) |
| MTX + ethanolic extract (200 mg/Kg b.wt) | 1.65 ± 0.07 d, 27.1% (↑) | 4.58 ± 0.16 a,b, 4.2% (↓) |
* percentage increase or inhibition. Total bilirubin (mg/dL); Total protein (g/dL) Values are expressed as mean ± SE (n = 6 rats). In the same column, the presence of different letters (a–f) indicating a significant difference between groups using ANOVA in SPSS software (at p < 0.05), the letter “a” is the nearest result to the control while letter ”f” is the furthest from the control group.