| Literature DB >> 35540831 |
Zhili Xiong1, Yanmin Wang1, Lang Lang1, Shuping Ma1, Longshan Zhao1, Wei Xiao2, Yanjuan Wang1.
Abstract
Acute lung injury (ALI) is a severe respiratory disease. To date, no medical interventions have been proven effective in improving the outcome. Reduning injection (RDN) showed a potential effect in the therapy of ALI. However, seldom does research concern the holistic pharmacological mechanisms of RDN on ALI. A metabolomic strategy, based on two consecutive extractions of the lung tissue, has been developed to investigate therapeutic mechanisms of RDN on ALI model rat. The extraction procedure was an aqueous extraction with methanol-water followed by organic extraction with dichloromethane-methanol. According to the lipophilicity of extracts, aqueous extracts were analyzed on the T3 column and organic extracts on the C18 column. Partial least-squares discriminant analysis was utilized to identify differences in metabolic profiles of rats. A total of 14 potential biomarkers in lung tissue were identified, which mainly related to phospholipid metabolism, sphingolipid metabolism, nucleotide metabolism and energy metabolism. The combined analytical method provides complementary metabolomics information for exploring the action mechanism of RDN against ALI. And the obtained results indicate metabolomics is a promising tool for understanding the holism and synergism of traditional Chinese medicine. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 35540831 PMCID: PMC9078858 DOI: 10.1039/c7ra13123b
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Measurement of total protein, IL-6 and TNF-α in the BALF
| Groups | Total protein (mg mL−1) | IL-6 (pg mL−1) | TNF-α (pg mL−1) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 0.14 ± 0.03 | 21.31 ± 3.61 | 18.82 ± 2.45 |
| Model group | 0.18 ± 0.02 | 34.15 ± 5.88 | 25.63 ± 4.00 |
| Treatment group | 0.15 ± 0.01 | 29.10 ± 3.06 | 20.70 ± 2.74 |
P < 0.01 compared with control group.
P < 0.001 compared with control group.
P < 0.05 compared with model group.
P < 0.01 compared with model group.
Fig. 1Typical base peak intensity (BPI) chromatograms of QC samples in positive mode. (A) Aqueous extracts analyzed by T3 column, (B) organic extracts analyzed by C18 column.
Fig. 2PLS-DA score plot between control group, model group and RDN treatment group based on the aqueous extracts (A), (C) and organic extracts (B), (D) in positive mode (: control group, : model group, : treatment group).
Potential biomarkers from aqueous extracts and organic extracts in positivea
|
| Adduct | Biomarker | Relative intensity (mean ± SD) | Changed trend | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Model | Treatment | Mode | Treatment | |||
|
| |||||||
| 103.9 | [M + H]+ | Choline | 884.4 ± 111.7 | 1009.2 ± 62.1 | 904.6 ± 129.4 | ↑* | ↓* |
| 132.0 | [M + H]+ | Creatine | 467.8 ± 58.2 | 388.7 ± 53.1 | 439.8 ± 25.7 | ↓* | ↑* |
| 162.1 | [M + H]+ | Carnitine | 228.0 ± 26.9 | 161.0 ± 52.6 | 251.5 ± 60.9 | ↓** | ↑** |
| 118.0 | [M + H]+ | Betaine | 168.5 ± 38.6 | 240.6 ± 51.3 | 183.4 ± 45.7 | ↑** | ↓* |
| 122.9 | [M + H]+ | Niacinamide | 674.9 ± 158.6 | 281.2 ± 107.8 | 543.4 ± 149.3 | ↓*** | ↑** |
| 136.9 | [M + H]+ | Hypoxanthine | 794.9 ± 96.9 | 683.2 ± 107.1 | 796.1 ± 96.9 | ↓* | ↑* |
| 153.0 | [M + H]+ | Xanthine | 225.5 ± 21.8 | 173.8 ± 31.9 | 223.0 ± 17.5 | ↓** | ↑** |
| 112.9 | [M + H]+ | Uracil | 56.1 ± 12.9 | 27.5 ± 5.4 | 36.4 ± 7.0 | ↓*** | ↑* |
|
| |||||||
| 103.9 | [M + H]+ | Choline | 885.7 ± 190.0 | 1050.2 ± 79.7 | 925.9 ± 156.0 | ↑* | ↓* |
| 136.9 | [M + H]+ | Hypoxanthine | 198.2 ± 37.3 | 153.5 ± 43.7 | 202.8 ± 39.2 | ↓* | ↑* |
| 274.3 | [M + H]+ | C16 sphinganine | 249.1 ± 61.2 | 314.1 ± 58.2 | 259.5 ± 25.4 | ↑* | ↓* |
| 318.3 | [M + H]+ | Phytosphingosine | 388.9 ± 71.1 | 293.0 ± 32.4 | 339.8 ± 27.9 | ↓** | ↑** |
| 302.3 | [M + H]+ | Sphinganine | 13.1 ± 4.8 | 32.9 ± 11.2 | 23.2 ± 8.1 | ↑*** | ↓* |
| 544.3 | [M + H]+ | LPC (20 : 4) | 19.7 ± 4.9 | 28.3 ± 4.8 | 12.8 ± 2.9 | ↑** | ↓*** |
| 496.2 | [M + H]+ | LPC (16 : 0) | 41.2 ± 8.5 | 61.6 ± 13.0 | 48.5 ± 11.4 | ↑** | ↓* |
| 524.3 | [M + H]+ | LPC (18 : 0) | 150.3 ± 15.0 | 171.4 ± 9.9 | 154.7 ± 8.7 | ↑** | ↓** |
| 362.3 | Unknown | 185.7 ± 17.6 | 116.8 ± 17.0 | 143.1 ± 15.1 | ↓*** | ↑** | |
| 119.0 | Unknown | 214.1 ± 40.1 | 74.4 ± 20.7 | 138.8 ± 35.8 | ↓*** | ↑*** | |
“↑” and “↓”: the compound is up-regulated and down-regulated (*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001).
Fig. 3Heat map of identified potential biomarkers based on the aqueous extracts (A) and organic extracts (B).
Fig. 4Product ion spectrum of biomarker at m/z 136.9 in positive ion mode and the proposed fragmentation pathway. The collision energy was 25 eV.
Fig. 5Metabolic pathways based on the identified potential biomarkers.