| Literature DB >> 35588406 |
Jing Zhao1,2,3, Kaixin Ding2,3, Manting Hou2,3, Yuanhua Li1,2,3, Xiaorong Hou2,3, Wenzhang Dai1,2,3, Zhiyong Li2,3, Jun Zhao2, Wenlong Liu1, Zhaofang Bai2,3.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Schisandra chinensis (Turcz.) Baill. (Magnoliaceae) essential oil (SCEO) composition is rich in lignans that are believed to perform protective effects in the liver.Entities:
Keywords: Drug-induced liver injury; antioxidant; autophagy; essential oil; oxidative stress
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35588406 PMCID: PMC9122381 DOI: 10.1080/13880209.2022.2067569
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharm Biol ISSN: 1388-0209 Impact factor: 3.889
Figure 1.Experimental protocol for APAP-induced liver injury (ALI) model and SCEO treatment processes.
Primer sequences used for real-time PCR detection.
| Gene | Type | Sequence (5′-3′) |
|---|---|---|
| P62 | Forward | CGTTTGACGGAAGGTAAAT |
| Reverse | TCATCAGCGGGCTGTATC | |
| LC3 | Forward | GATAATCAGACGGCGCTTGC |
| Reverse | ACTTCGGAGATGGGAGTGGA | |
| TNF-α | Forward | CCACCACGCTCTTCTGTCTAC |
| Reverse | GAGGGTCTGGGCCATAGAA | |
| IL-6 | Forward | ACAACCACGGCCTTCCCTACTT |
| Reverse | CACGATTTCCCAGAGAACATGTG | |
| CYP2E1 | Forward | CGTTGCCTTGCTTGTCTGGA |
| Reverse | AAGAAAGGAATTGGGAAAGGTCC | |
| HO-1 | Forward | TGCAGGTGATGCTGACAGAGG |
| Reverse | GGGATGAGCTAGTGCTGATCTGG | |
| NRF2 | Forward | CGAGATATACGCAGGAGAGGTAAGA |
| Reverse | GCTCGACAATGTTCTCCAGCTT | |
| GCLC | Forward | CAGTCAAGGACCGGCACAAG |
| Reverse | CAAGAACATCGCCTCCATTCAG | |
| β-actin | Forward | GGCTGTATTCCCCTCCATCG |
| Reverse | CCAGTTGGTAACAATGCCATGT |
Figure 2.Representative UPLC fingerprint of SCEO. (A) The chromatographic profile of SCEO analysed by UPLC; (B) Chemical structure of the main constituents of SCEO. (1) schisandrol A (2) schisandrol B (3) schizandrol A (4) schizandrol B (5) schizandrin A (6) schizandrin B, and (7) schizandrin C.
Concentrations of 7 index components of SCEO.
| Lot number | Mass fraction (mg/g) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Schisandrol A | Schisandrol B | Schizandrol A | Schizandrol B | Schizandrin A | Schizandrin B | Schizandrin C | |
| 20200407 | 18.52 | 5.04 | 1.29 | 2.04 | 4.08 | 5.92 | 0.72 |
| 200411 | 17.13 | 5.23 | 1.11 | 1.87 | 3.32 | 5.93 | 0.81 |
| 2020411 | 16.72 | 4.92 | 1.18 | 1.96 | 3.64 | 5.42 | 0.54 |
| Mean | 17.46 | 5.06 | 1.19 | 1.96 | 3.68 | 5.76 | 0.69 |
Figure 3.Effect of SCEO on alleviating APAP-induced liver injury. (A,B) Serum was collected for assessment of AST and ALT activity. (C) Representative histological images of the liver section with H&E stain (200× and 400× magnification). Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 8). ***p < 0.001 compared to the APAP group. ###p < 0.001 compared to the normal group.
Figure 4.Pre-treatment with SCEO in preventing APAP-induced liver failure. The levels of (A) TNF-α, and (B) IL-6 in the serum were measured by ELISA kits, the hepatic mRNA expression of (C) TNF-α, and (D) IL-6 were determined by real-time PCR. Data were expressed as mean ± S.D (n = 8). ***P < 0.001 compared with the APAP group and ###P < 0.001 compared with control group.
Figure 5.SCEO alleviated hepatic oxidative stress in APAP-induced hepatotoxicity mice. (A) Tissue MDA levels. (B) Tissue SOD activities. (C) Tissue GSH activities. (D) Tissue CYP2E1 levels. (E) mRNA expression levels of CYP2E1. Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 8). ###p < 0.001 compared to the normal group; ***p < 0.001 compared to the APAP group.
Figure 6.The effect of SCEO on the Nrf2 signal pathway. (A–E) protein expression of Nrf2, HO-1, GCLC, GCLM, (F–G) mRNA level of Nrf2, GCLC, and HO-1 in liver tissues of mice exposed to APAP overdose, β- actin served as a loading control. The values are reported as the means ± SD (n = 8). ###p < 0.001 compared with the normal group; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 compared with the APAP group.
Figure 7.SCEO upregulated hepatic autophagy in APAP-induced hepatotoxicity mice. (A–C) The protein level of p62, LC3 I, and LC3 II were determined (D–E) mRNA levels of p62, and LC3, β-actin served as a loading control. The values are reported as the means ± SD (n = 8). ###p < 0.001 compared with the normal group; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 compared with the APAP group.