| Literature DB >> 34239584 |
Zhong Han1,2, Jianmin Guo1,2,3, Feibiao Meng2, Haifeng Liao2, Yinghua Deng2, Yuankeng Huang2, Xialing Lei2, Chun Liang3,4, Richou Han1, Wei Yang1,2,3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Forsythin is the main ingredient of Forsythia suspensa and is widely used in treatment of fever, viral cold, gonorrhea, and ulcers clinically. This study aimed to evaluate the potential genetic toxicity of forsythin and its safety for human use.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34239584 PMCID: PMC8233079 DOI: 10.1155/2021/6610793
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1The diagram of forsythin determined by high-performance liquid chromatography-UV (HPLC-UV).
Results of the bacterial reverse mutation test (Ames test) for forsythin.
| S9 | Chemical | Dose ( | His+ revertant colonies/plate | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TA97 | TA98 | TA100 | TA102 | TA1535 | |||
| − | DMSO (1%)a | 0 | 137.4 ± 30.8 | 16.4 ± 2.5 | 75.2 ± 43.5 | 263.8 ± 127.4 | 12.8 ± 0.5 |
| Dexonb | 100 | 1609.0 ± 273.9 | 1122.2 ± 593.0 | 1429.6 ± 101.3 | 2253.1 ± 431.8 | ||
| Sodium azideb | 15 | 2170.2 ± 332.2 | |||||
| Forsythin | 2500 | 125.2 ± 54.2 | 21.0 ± 5.6 | 65.7 ± 51.8 | 333.8 ± 112.4 | 10.5 ± 4.4 | |
| 1250 | 154.0 ± 33.0 | 17.5 ± 4.5 | 53.1 ± 38.2 | 285.8 ± 52.8 | 11.8 ± 2.1 | ||
| 625 | 128.9 ± 52.4 | 13.3 ± 4.7 | 61.4 ± 48.3 | 237.7 ± 118.8 | 11.6 ± 3.2 | ||
| 312 | 144.8 ± 51.1 | 18.4 ± 9.3 | 61.3 ± 44.3 | 216.6 ± 85.3 | 10.2 ± 1.6 | ||
| 156 | 135.2 ± 16.9 | 18.7 ± 6.0 | 56.3 ± 44.5 | 200.5 ± 42.0 | 11.7 ± 1.4 | ||
|
| |||||||
| + | DMSO (1%)a | 0 | 157.1 ± 54.7 | 15.7 ± 4.2 | 77.9 ± 57.4 | 318.6 ± 86.6 | 16.7 ± 5.0 |
| 2-Aminofluorineb | 30 | 1027.5 ± 296.2 | 2936.6 ± 686.4 | 768.7 ± 88.3 | |||
| 1, 8-Dioxyanthraquinoneb | 50 | 934.6 ± 69.6 | |||||
| Cyclophosphamideb | 200 | 459.8 ± 178.9 | |||||
| Forsythin | 2500 | 160.4 ± 28.0 | 17.4 ± 6.0 | 79.8 ± 71.5 | 343.1 ± 172.3 | 11.6 ± 3.8 | |
| 1250 | 162.0 ± 39.6 | 21.8 ± 2.0 | 68.8 ± 54.0 | 344.9 ± 75.4 | 13.2 ± 0.9 | ||
| 625 | 160.5 ± 38.3 | 17.5 ± 6.5 | 77.1 ± 72.9 | 274.1 ± 101.7 | 10.6 ± 1.9 | ||
| 312 | 153.1 ± 42.1 | 19.3 ± 3.8 | 59.1 ± 64.0 | 307.9 ± 154.7 | 10.6 ± 4.0 | ||
| 156 | 170.3 ± 41.3 | 17.4 ± 3.1 | 68.4 ± 56.2 | 278.8 ± 66.5 | 14.2 ± 3.4 | ||
Data are expressed as means ± standard deviation (SD). p < 0.05, compared with the negative control group; p < 0.01, compared with the negative control group. aNegative control. bPositive control.
Results of the chromosomal aberrations test for forsythin.
| Group | Dosage ( | Number of cells scored | No. of cells with aberrations | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| −S9 | +S9 | ||||
| 24 h | 48 h | 6–18 h | |||
| DMSOa | — | 200 | 4.0 | 2.5 | 2.0 |
| Mitomycin Cb | 0.25 | 200 | 14.5 | 18.5 | |
| Cyclophosphamideb | 20 | 200 | 19.0 | ||
| Forsythin | 125 | 200 | 5.0 | 2.5 | 5.0 |
| 250 | 200 | 4.5 | 1.5 | 5.0 | |
| 500 | 200 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 4.5 | |
aNegative control. bPositive control. p < 0.05, compared with the negative control group. p < 0.01, compared with the negative control group.
Results of the in vivo bone marrow micronucleus test for forsythin.
| Group | Dosage (mg/kg) | Number of mice | MNPCEc | PCE/(PCE + NCE)d |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.5% CMC-Naa | — | 10 | 0.6 ± 0.4 | 44.3 ± 10.7 |
| Cyclophosphamideb | 80 | 10 | 13.0 ± 4.1 | 43.2 ± 7.6 |
| Forsythin | 4500 | 10 | 1.0 ± 0.6 | 55.4 ± 8.9 |
| 9000 | 10 | 1.2 ± 0.8 | 42.6 ± 10.1 | |
| 18000 | 10 | 1.6 ± 0.8 | 45.1 ± 3.9 |
Data expressed as means ± SD. p < 0.05, compared with the negative control group. p < 0.01, compared with the negative control group. aNegative control. bPositive control. cMicronucleated polychromatic erythrocytes (MNPCEs) calculated from 2000 polychromatic erythrocytes (%). dThe ratio (%) of polychromatic erythrocytes (PCE) and all erythrocytes (PCE + NEC). NEC, normochromatic erythrocytes.
Figure 2The effects of forsythin (0, 24, 72, and 216 mg/kg) on MP (a), heart rate (b), QTcF (c), body temperature (d), respiratory rate (e), and tidal volume (f) in conscious beagle dogs. All assays were conducted in compliance with Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) regulations. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD). n = 6.