| Literature DB >> 35872841 |
Bin Yu1,2, Maoru Wang3, Hui Xu2, Rongrong Gao2, Yuanying Zhu2, Hong Ning1, Xiaoyu Dai4.
Abstract
Hepatoma is one of the most common malignant tumors. The incidence rate is high in developing countries, and China has the most significant number of cases. Dahuang is a classic traditional antitumor drug commonly used in China and has also been applied to treat hepatoma. However, the potential mechanism of Dahuang in treating hepatoma is not clear. Therefore, this study is aimed at elucidating the possible molecular mechanism and key targets of Dahuang using methods of network pharmacology, molecular docking, and survival analysis. Firstly, the active ingredients and key targets of Dahuang were analyzed through public databases, and then the drug-ingredient-target-disease network diagram of Dahuang against hepatoma was constructed. Five main active components and five core targets were determined according to the enrichment degree. Enrichment analysis demonstrated that Dahuang treated hepatoma through the multiple pathways in cancer. Additionally, molecular docking predicted that aloe-emodin and PIK3CG depicted the best binding energy. Survival analysis indicated that a high/ESR1 gene expression had a relatively good prognosis for patients with hepatoma (p < 0.05). In conclusion, the current study results demonstrated that Dahuang could treat hepatoma through a variety of active ingredients, targets, and multiantitumor pathways. Moreover, it effectively improved the prognosis of hepatoma patients. ESR1 is the potential key gene that is beneficial for the survival of hepatoma patients. Also, aloe-emodin and beta-sitosterol are the two main active crucial ingredients for hepatoma treatment. The study also provided some functional bases and references for the development of new drugs, target mining, and experimental animal research of hepatoma in the future.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35872841 PMCID: PMC9307382 DOI: 10.1155/2022/5975223
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.246
Figure 1Technological roadmap for study.
Information of active ingredients and related targets from Dahuang.
| mol ID | mol name | mol structure | Related targets | OB (%) | DL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MOL002235 | Eupatin |
| NOS2, AR, F10, PTGS2, F8, TOP2, ESR2, DPP4, HSP90AB1, HSP90AA1, PRSS1, NCOA2, CALM1, F2, SCN5A, KDR, PPARD | 50.80 | 0.41 |
| MOL002259 | Physciondiglucoside |
| TOP2 | 41.65 | 0.63 |
| MOL002268 | Rhein |
| PTGS1, PTGS2, HSP90AB1, HSP90AA1, PIK3CG, NCOA2, AKR1B1, JUN | 47.07 | 0.28 |
| MOL002280 | Torachrysone-8-O-beta-D-(6′-oxayl)-glucoside |
| TOP2 | 43.02 | 0.74 |
| MOL002281 | Toralactone |
| NOS2, PTGS1, ESR1, PTGS2, ESR2, HSP90AB1, HSP90AA1, PIK3CG, CHEK1 | 46.46 | 0.24 |
| MOL002288 | Emodin-1-O-beta-D-glucopyranoside |
| TOP2 | 44.81 | 0.80 |
| MOL002297 | Daucosterol_qt |
| PGR, NCOA2 | 35.89 | 0.70 |
| MOL000358 | Beta-sitosterol |
| PGR, NCOA2, PTGS1, PTGS2, HSP90AB1, HSP90AA1, PIK3CG, KCNH2, DRD1, CHRM3, CHRM1, SCN5A, GABRA2, CHRM4, PDE3A, HTR2A, GABRA5, ADRA1A, GABRA3, CHRM2, ADRA1B, ADRB2, CHRNA2, SLC6A4, OPRM1, GABRA1, CHRNA7, BCL2, CASP9, JUN, CASP3, CASP8, PRKCA, TGFB1, PON1, MAP2 | 36.91 | 0.75 |
| MOL000471 | Aloe-emodin |
| PTGS1, PTGS2, HSP90AB1, HSP90AA1, PIK3CG, NCOA2, PKIA, AKR1B1, IGHG1, CDKN1A, EIF6, TNF, CASP3, TP53, FAS, PRKCA, PRKCE, CRK2, PCNA, MYC, IL1B, PRKCD | 83.38 | 0.24 |
| MOL000096 | (-)-Catechin |
| PTGS1, ESR1, PTGS2, HSP90AB1, HSP90AA1, ampC, NCOA2, CALM1, FAS, PPARG | 49.68 | 0.24 |
Figure 2Venn diagram.
Figure 3PPI network map.
Figure 4Drug-ingredient-target-disease network diagram.
Figure 5The results of GO functional enrichment analysis.
Figure 6Bubble diagrams of the KEGG pathway enrichment analysis.
Figure 7The results of KEGG enrichment analysis.
Figure 8The anti hepatoma pathway of Dahuang.
Molecular docking results of 5 main active ingredients and 5 core targets.
| Target | PDB ID | Target structure | Active ingredients | Affinity (kJ·mol−1) | Best-docked complex (3D) and (2D) | Interacting residues | Type of interactions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TGFB1 | 5VQP |
| Aloe-emodin | -7.08 |
| ALA 76, TYR 75, TYR 74, ASP 73, ALA 72, ARG 123, ARG 58, LEU 28, LYS 27, LYS 77 | Hydrophobic interaction, hydrogen bond interactions |
| Beta-sitosterol | -6.41 | ||||||
| Eupatin | -7.35 | ||||||
| Toralactone | -7.26 | ||||||
| (-)-Catechin | -7.17 | ||||||
| PTGS2 | 5IKR |
| Aloe-emodin | -8.46 |
| PHE 518, MET 522, VAL 523, GLY 526, ALA 527, LEU 531, LEU 359, MET 113, VAL 116, ARG 120, VAL 349, LEU 352, YTR 355, TRP 387, TYR 385, LEU 384, PHE 381 | Hydrophobic interaction, hydrogen bond interactions |
| Beta-sitosterol | -6.54 | ||||||
| Eupatin | -7.66 | ||||||
| Toralactone | -7.46 | ||||||
| (-)-Catechin | -7.73 | ||||||
| PIK3CG | 6AUD |
| Aloe-emodin | -9.07 |
| ALA 885, VAL 882, ILE 881, GLU 880, TYR 867, ILE 879, PHE 961, ILE 962, ASP 964, HIP 967, ILE 831, LYS 883, MET 804, PRO 810, TRP 812, MET 963 | Hydrophobic interaction, hydrogen bond interactions |
| Beta-sitosterol | -7.29 | ||||||
| Eupatin | -7.68 | ||||||
| Toralactone | -7.98 | ||||||
| (-)-Catechin | -8.49 | ||||||
| ESR1 | 7KCD |
| Aloe-emodin | -7.97 |
| MET 929, GLU 930, TYR 931, LEU 932, GLY 935, ASP 939, GLY 856, LEU 855, VAL 863, LEU 983, ASP 994, GLY 993, VAL 911, ALA 880 | Hydrophobic interaction, hydrogen bond interactions |
| Beta-sitosterol | -6.75 | ||||||
| Eupatin | -7.55 | ||||||
| Toralactone | -7.43 | ||||||
| (-)-Catechin | -8.94 | ||||||
| JUN | 5AEP |
| Aloe-emodin | -8.71 |
| LEU 428, PHE 404, PHE 425, ILE 424, MET 421, LEU 525, GLY 521, TRP 383, LEU 384, MET 388, LEU 391, ARG 394, MET 343, LEU 346, LEU 349, ALA 350, GLU 353 | Hydrophobic interaction, hydrogen bond interactions |
| Beta-sitosterol | -6.96 | ||||||
| Eupatin | -7.36 | ||||||
| Toralactone | -7.89 | ||||||
| (-)-Catechin | -7.73 |
Figure 9The heat map of molecular docking results.
Figure 10Survival analysis for 5 main genes by TCGA.