| Literature DB >> 35153745 |
Hang Zhou1,2, Yi Yang2, Linwen Deng2, Yongqing Yao2, Xin Liao3.
Abstract
Background: Kidney-tonifying herbs (KTHs) are widely used to treat unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion (URSA) based on the theory of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). However, there is still a lack of systematic evaluation and mechanistic explanation for these treatments. Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical efficacy, and to investigate the potential mechanisms, of KTH based on TCM for the treatment of URSA.Entities:
Keywords: clinical trials and validation experiments; embryo implantation; kidney-tonifying herbs; tumor invasion; unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion
Year: 2022 PMID: 35153745 PMCID: PMC8826263 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.775245
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pharmacol ISSN: 1663-9812 Impact factor: 5.810
FIGURE 1Clinical evidence and underlying mechanisms of kidney-tonifying herbs (KTHs) for treating unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion (USRA).
FIGURE 2Bibliometric analysis of KTHs on abortion. (A) Number of articles published in time. (B) Keyword colinear analysis. (C) Polar coordinate histogram. (D) Keyword co-occurrence chart. (E) Keyword clustering analysis timeline chart.
The basic characteristics of the included studies.
| References | Sample size | Age (years) | Abortion time (days) | Times of abortions | Intervention time | Intervention measures | Duration of intervention | Main outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| T:60 | T:30.12 ± 3.63 | NR | T:3.35 ± 0.62 | NR | T:KTHs (1/dose/day) + C | 12 weeks | ①③⑥ |
| C:60 | C:29.67 ± 3.42 | C:2.98 ± 0.56 | C: dydrogesterone (10 mg, bid, po) | |||||
|
| T:60 | T:28.76 ± 2.51 | T:68.92 ± 5.12 | T:4.12 ± 0.16 | 3 days after ovulation | T:KTHs (1/dose/day) + C | Until the 12th week of pregnancy | ①②③④⑤⑥ |
| C:60 | C:29.02 ± 2.47 | C:69.13 ± 5.07 | C:4.15 ± 0.23 | C: dydrogesterone (10 mg, qd, po) | ||||
|
| T:40 | T:32.33 ± 4.74 | NR | NR | NR | T: modified STP (1/dose/day) + C | 4 weeks | ①④⑥⑦ |
| C:40 | C:30.75 ± 4.02 | C: aspirin (25 mg, tid, po) | ||||||
|
| T:45 | T:29.43 ± 5.42 | T:60.02 ± 12.41 | T:2.53 ± 0.69 | After diagnosis | T:KTHs (1/dose/day) + C | Until 3 months of pregnancy | ①②④⑤⑦ |
| C:45 | C:29.14 ± 5.13 | C:59.77 ± 11.36 | C:2.47 ± 0.66 | C: aspirin (25 mg, tid, po) + metacortandracin (5 mg, po, qn) + dydrogesterone (10 mg, bid, po) | ||||
|
| T1:86 | T1:27.7 ± 2.8 | NR | T1:2.81 ± 0.57 | NR | T1:KTHs (1/dose/day) | Until the 12th week of pregnancy | ①②④⑥⑦ |
| T2:87 | T2:28.1 ± 2.6 | T2:2.88 ± 0.53 | T2:KTHs (1/dose/day) + C | |||||
| C:88 | C:27.6 ± 2.5 | C:2.72 ± 0.48 | C: dydrogesterone (10 mg, bid, po) | |||||
|
| T1:79 | T1:28.6 ± 3.1 | NR | T1:2.67 ± 0.47 | NR | T1:KTHs (1/dose/day) | 12 weeks | ①②④⑦ |
| T2:84 | T2:29.1 ± 2.5 | T2:2.79 ± 0.45 | T2:KTHs (1/dose/day) + C | |||||
| C:44 | C:28.2 ± 2.7 | C:2.65 ± 0.44 | C: dydrogesterone (10 mg, bid, po) | |||||
|
| T:30 | T:30.5 ± 2.7 | T:47.6 ± 5.6 | T:30.5 ± 2.7 | NR | T:KTHs (1/dose/day) + C | 4 weeks | ①④⑤ |
| C:30 | C:28.6 ± 2.9 | C:48.3 ± 5.6 | C:28.6 ± 2.9 | C: dydrogesterone (10 mg, bid, po) | ||||
|
| T:28 | T:28.5 ± 3.5 | T:55.3 ± 16.8 | T:3.2 ± 0.6 | NR | T:KTHs (1/dose/day) + C | Until the 20th week of pregnancy | ①②③④⑥⑦ |
| C:28 | C:29.3 ± 3.0 | C:56.7 ± 15.4 | C:3.6 ± 0.4 | C:Active immunotherapy (intradermal injection every 3 weeks, two times for a course of treatment) | ||||
|
| T:30 | T:28.73 ± 4.29 | NR | T:2.4 ± 0.62 | 3 months before planned pregnancy | T: KTHs (1/dose/day) + C | Until the 12th week of pregnancy | ①③⑥ |
| C:30 | C:30.77 ± 5.70 | C:2.60 ± 0.72 | C: progesterone capsule/progesterone injection (20~40 mg po/im qd) |
Note. T, trial group; C, control group; NR, not reported; ①, clinical response rate; ②, syndrome integral; ③, pregnancy outcome; ④, immune function-related outcome indicators; ⑤, coagulation function test; ⑥, reproductive hormone test; ⑦, adverse event report.
FIGURE 3Risks of bias assessment.
FIGURE 4Forest plot of experimental treatment vs. control treatment for the main outcomes. (A) Forest plot of clinical response rate of KTHs treated URSA (combined treatment vs. conventional treatment or pure Western medicine vs. KTHs). (B) Forest plot of pregnancy outcomes of KTHs treated URSA.
FIGURE 5Forest plot of experimental treatment vs. control treatment in secondary outcomes. (A) Forest plot of hormone index. (B) Forest plot of serum immunological indexes.
FIGURE 6Selection of representative drugs and screening of action targets of KTHs. (A) Drug network. (B) The top drugs used frequently in KTHs. (C) The drug targets and URSA targets are intersected. (D) The ingredients of the four herbs in KTHs. (E) Venn diagram of drug and disease targets.
FIGURE 7Network diagram of screening literature research indicators.
FIGURE 8PPI analysis and core gene screening. (A) Protein interaction network of intersecting genes. (B) The top five DEGs with the score (density * # nodes), nodes, and edges of each cluster were expressed. (C–G) The network graph of five foundation clusters.
FIGURE 9Molecular docking results of active components for KTH and URSA targets. (A) The heatmap of docking possibilities of major effective compounds and target proteins of KTHs. (B–E) The best conformation of the most effective compound and its corresponding protein receptor in KTHs.
FIGURE 10BP and KEGG enrichment analysis of URSA under the action of KTHs. (A) Bioaccumulation analysis of mcode core targets, the left part represents the count value, and the right part represents the log p-value. (B) Enrichment and distraction of core target KEGG based on Metascape. (C) Construction of drug component target pathway manifestation disease framework.
Core components and targets of KTHs.
| Pubchem CID | Key components | Molecular structure | Weight g/mol | Possible target of URSA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 101967018 | Sylvestroside III | C27H36O14 | 584.60 | AKT1, ALK, CASP1, CASP8, CDK1, CFTR, CNR1, F10, FGFR1, FLT3, FLT4, IGF1R, JAK2, KDR, KIT, MAPK1, MMP2, MMP3, MMP9, NTRK1, PARP1, REN, RET, SLC2A1, and WNT3A |
| 442915 | Japonine | C18H17NO3 | 295.30 | ABCB1, ABCG2, CREBBP, CYP17A1, DRD2, FGFR1, FLT1, JAK2, MMP1, MTOR, NPM1, NR3C1, NTRK1, PGR, PIK3CA, PLK1, TACR1, and TEK |
| 12442899 | sophranol | C15H24N2O2 | 264.36 | ABCB1, ACE, ADRB2, ALK, AR, CYP19A1, GBA, HTR1A, HTR3A, JAK2, KCNH2, PARP1, REN, SCN5A, SLC6A4, and TACR1 |
| 5281636 | Gentisin | C14H10O5 | 258.23 | MAOA, PTGS2, ABL1, ALK, ALPL, CASP3, CDK4, CHEK2, COMT, DYRK1A, ESR1, ESR2, FLT1, GUSB, HSP90AA1, IGF1R, KDR, MET, MMP1, MMP3, MTOR, PIK3CA, PLK1, RET, and STAT3 |
| 5962 | Lysine | C6H14N2O2 | 146.19 | PLG, SHBG, AR, ODC1, GRIA2, and PEPD |
| 91466 | Matrine | C15H24N2O | 248.36 | CTSB, HTR3A, and PARP1 |
FIGURE 11Tumor signaling pathways interact with a variety of signaling pathways, which are closely related to embryo implantation. Orange represents the core target of KTHs.
FIGURE 12Possible treatment R&D ideas in the future. (A) Similarities between malignant tumor and embryo implantation: a new entry point of USRA treatment mechanism. (B) The cross- core genes of KTHs and URSA are used to guide the results of single cells.
The main biological processes of cancer progression and embryo implantation, and the targets of related components in traditional Chinese medicine.
| Cell biological processes | The significance in embryonic development | The significance in cancer progression | The related genes obtained in this study | Components of KTHs |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regulation of epithelial cell proliferation | Promote the uterus into the receptive state, decidualization of uterine stromal cells and the occurrence of placenta ( | It can make tumor proliferate rapidly, compress tissue, and promote angiogenesis ( | AR, TNF, XDH, PPARG, PGR, VDR, STAT3, JUN, MTOR, EGFR, KDR, AKT1, SHH, ITGB3, SCN5A, HIF1A, AGTR1, ITGA4, GLUL, FLT1, FGFR1, TEK, FLT4, WNT3A, and CCND1 | (a), (b), (d), €, and (f) |
| Epithelial cell migration | It can promote the mutual recognition and interaction between blastotrophoblast cells and endometrial cells, and promote the balance of maternal–fetal interface ( | Cell migration plays an important role in the early occurrence and development of various cancers, especially before primary tumor cells develop into invasive lesions ( | PTGS2, TNF, PPARG, PTPN11, JUN, MTOR, PIK3CA, SRC, KDR, MMP9, MET, AKT1, ITGB3, HIF1A, ITGB1, GLUL, ABL1, FGFR1, TEK, FLT4, and KIT | (b), (e), and (f) |
| Regulation of tissue remodeling | Embryo implantation and development involve degradation and remodeling of extracellular matrix, placental villous vasculogenesis, and reconstruction of uterine spiral artery ( | Tumor destroys normal tissue and makes it remodel to change its original biological function ( | PLG, IL2, VDR, MDM2, MMP2, MMP14, EGFR, SRC, ITGB3, HIF1A, ADRB2, ACE, IL6, and FLT4 | (a), (d), and (e) |
| Response to oxidative stress | Excessive ROS can cause mitochondrial damage, DNA damage, lipid peroxidation, and even cell apoptosis in embryos, and then lead to embryonic development arrest ( | High level and long-term oxidative stress can directly damage tissues through this redox system, and also lead to oxidative modification of amino acid residues and DNA mutation, thus promoting the occurrence of tumor ( | PTGS2, TNF, PTGS1, MDM2, JUN, MMP3, MMP2, MMP14, EGFR, MPO, SRC, CDK1, MMP9, MET, AKT1, MAPT, PARP1, HIF1A, JAK2, CASP3, IL6, ABL1, CCNA2, MAPK1, and PSEN1 | (a), (b), (c), (e), and (f) |
| Regulation of mitochondrion organization | In the process of embryo implantation, the number, distribution, and activity of mitochondria are regulated strictly and orderly, and affect the embryo implantation potential at the same time ( | The malignant phenotypes of tumor cells, such as unlimited proliferation, abnormal metabolism, inhibition of apoptosis, strong invasion, and easy metastasis, are also closely related to mitochondrial dysfunction ( | BCL2L1, KDR, MMP9, AKT1, MAPT, HIF1A, GBA, and CASP8 | (a), (e), and (f) |
| Response to lipopolysaccharides | Inflammation and infection result in LPS affecting decidual differentiation through toll-like receptor 4, which leads to stress injury and thrombosis of trophoblast ( | LPS can promote tumor survival by activating upregulated inflammatory signaling pathway, and can also increase the expression of adhesion factors of tumor cells to endothelial cells by activating neutrophils ( | NOS2, PTGS2, TNF, CNR1, MPO, SRC, AKT1, CCR5, REN, JAK2, ELANE, SELE, SELP, CASP3, CASP8, CASP1, IL6, CDK4, ALPL, ABL1, COMT, and MAPK1 | (a), (b), (e), and (f) |
| Regulation of autophagy | Autophagy can affect embryo delayed implantation, abnormal decidua, and reduce the expression of autophagy in endometrial receptive period to ensure the success of embryo implantation ( | Moderate autophagy can make the damaged tumor cells survive, while excessive autophagy can accelerate the death of tumor cells ( | STAT3, MTOR, PIK3CA, KDR, MET, AKT1, MAPT, HIF1A, GBA, ADRB2, CASP3, and ABL1 | (a), (b), (e), and (f) |
| Regulation of apoptotic signaling pathway | Proapoptotic factors and antiapoptotic factors play a key role in regulating the survival and apoptosis of embryonic cells, and the balance between them determines the survival or death of embryos ( | Imbalance in the ratio of proliferation and apoptosis of tumor cells is the key factor in tumorigenesis and progression ( | AR, PTGS2, TNF, TERT, MDM2, BCL2L1, SRC, MMP9, AKT1, PARP1, HIF1A, JAK2, CASP8, RET, FGFR1, and PSEN1 | (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) |
| Regulation of inflammatory response | The balance of pro-inflammatory factors and anti-inflammatory factors promotes endometrial receptivity, and appropriate inflammatory environment promotes embryo implantation and pregnancy maintenance ( | The infiltration of inflammatory cells and the production of ROS are necessary and sufficient conditions to accelerate the carcinogenesis ( | NOS2, PTGS2, TNF, IL2, ESR1, CYP19A1, PPARG, CNR1, F2, TLR9, STAT3, MMP3, EGFR, MMP9, GBA, JAK2, ELANE, SELE, CASP1, AGTR1, IL6, and TEK | (a), (b), (e), and (f) |
| Regulation of angiogenesis | On the basis of the original blood vessels, the formation of blood vessels through the process of endothelial cell proliferation, and migration is conducive to the development and infiltration of embryonic cells ( | It can promote the secretion of tumor cells, promote angiogenic factors, promote the proliferation of endothelial cells, and chemotaxis the migration of endothelial cells ( | PTGS2, TNF, TERT, PPARG, STAT3, KDR, HIF1A, ITGB1, AGTR1, IL6, GLUL, FLT1, ABL1, and TEK | (b), (e), and (f) |
| Epithelial–mesenchymal transition, EMT | It can make endometrial epithelial and stromal cells more invasive and mobile, promote embryonic organ formation, embryonic differentiation, and nervous system differentiation ( | EMT plays an important role in the invasion and metastasis of tumor | MMP2, MMP7, NOS2, MET, CDK1, CYP19A1, SHH, JAK2, CCNA2, MMP1, MMP3, MDM2, EGFR, ABL1, CHEK2, PGR, RET, ABCB1, STAT3, IL6, CASP3, VDR, ABCG2, PIK3CA, IGF1R, HIF1A, TLR9, JUN, AR, TNF, ITGB1, KIT, F2, PTGS2, CCND1, ESR1, CDK4, SLC2A1, FLT1, TERT, SRC, REN, PTPN11, ALK, CASP8, PPARG, NR3C1, MTOR, DRD2, AGTR1, HSP90AA1, PARP1, KDR, BCL2L1, and MMP9 | (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) |
Note. The main active components in KTHs: (a) Sophranol; (b) Japonine; (c) Matrine; (d) Lysine; (e) Sylvestroside III; and (f) Gentisin.