| Literature DB >> 36091226 |
Sidan Long1,2, Shuangshuang Ji1, Peng Xue2, Hongting Xie1, Yinjie Ma2, Shijie Zhu2.
Abstract
Purpose: Shiliao Decoction (SLD) was developed for treatment and prevention of cancer-associated malnutrition (CAM) in China. In this study, we aim to discover SLD's active compounds and demonstrate the mechanisms of SLD that combat CAM through network pharmacology and molecular docking techniques.Entities:
Keywords: cancer-associated malnutrition; immunity; molecular docking; network pharmacology; prognosis; shiliao decoction
Year: 2022 PMID: 36091226 PMCID: PMC9452828 DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2022.985991
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Nutr ISSN: 2296-861X
FIGURE 1Workflow diagram of network pharmacology analysis.
The composition of SLD.
| Species | Drug name | Part used | Dosage (g) |
| Dangshen | Root | 20 | |
| Huajiao | Pericarp | 10 | |
| Chenpi | Pericarp | 10 | |
| Yiyiren | Semen | 30 | |
| Shanyao | Root | 15 | |
| Puhuang | Pollen | 10 | |
| Sharen | Fruit | 10 | |
| Shengjiang | Root | 5 | |
| Dazao | Fruit | 10 | |
| Gancao | Root | 10 | |
| Total | 130 |
Information table of key compounds of SLD.
| Compound-ID | Compound name | Degree value |
| MOL000098 | Quercetin | 84 |
| MOL000006 | Luteolin | 35 |
| MOL000422 | Kaempferol | 32 |
| MOL005828 | Nobiletin | 25 |
| MOL004328 | Naringenin | 23 |
| MOL003896 | 7-Methoxy-2-methyl isoflavone | 22 |
| MOL000392 | Formononetin | 21 |
| MOL000497 | Licochalconea | 20 |
| MOL000354 | Isorhamnetin | 20 |
| MOL000500 | Vestitol | 17 |
| MOL004957 | HMO | 17 |
| MOL000358 | Beta-sitosterol | 17 |
FIGURE 2Construction of the target genes set (A) and compound-target network (B). Blue quadrilateral nodes indicate targets, while differentially colored V nodes denote compounds. The dark yellow, light purple, light red, light blue, dark green, gray, dark red, dark purple, light yellow, and light green V nodes represent active compounds of Glycyrrhiza uralensis Fisch., Amomum villosum Lour., Citrus reticulata Blanco., Dioscorea opposite Thunb., Coix lacryma-jobi L.var.ma-yuen (Roman.) Stapf., Codonopsis pilosula (Franch.) Nannf., Ziziphus jujuba Mill., Typha angustifolia L., Zingiber officinale Rosc., Zanthoxylum bungeanum Maxim., respectively.
FIGURE 3PPI network (A) and its key target network (B).
Topological parameters of the top 10 core targets.
| Name | Betweenness | Closeness | Degree | Eigenvector | Network | Subgragh |
| JUN | 180.374288 | 0.77083333 | 26 | 0.27641884 | 21.5991641 | 223861.828 |
| TP53 | 88.6903298 | 0.7254902 | 23 | 0.2610248 | 17.064563 | 199612.516 |
| MAPK3 | 91.2776653 | 0.7254902 | 23 | 0.26607129 | 17.7049667 | 207408.578 |
| MAPK1 | 85.432815 | 0.71153846 | 22 | 0.25171047 | 16.1937549 | 185626.031 |
| MAPK14 | 75.9562576 | 0.68518519 | 20 | 0.23496044 | 13.3996192 | 161742.578 |
| STAT3 | 72.7535152 | 0.68518519 | 20 | 0.23960288 | 13.1754302 | 168192.469 |
| AKT1 | 49.5316515 | 0.67272727 | 19 | 0.2281941 | 12.6352595 | 152559.438 |
| HSP90AA1 | 53.8797507 | 0.63793103 | 18 | 0.20564286 | 12.145766 | 123908.617 |
| FOS | 51.7518378 | 0.64912281 | 17 | 0.20146626 | 10.3957445 | 118919.898 |
| MYC | 20.7274333 | 0.63793103 | 16 | 0.21363621 | 10.7609307 | 133712.031 |
FIGURE 4Enrichment analysis. (A) GO enrichment analysis. (B) KEGG enrichment analysis. (C) The most enriched KEGG pathway. Red genes in the network is the SLD target genes.
FIGURE 5Immune infiltration and prognosis. (A–D) Association of JUN with the prognosis of different cancers. (E) Correlation of JUN expression with immune cells.
FIGURE 6Differential expression of JUN in cancers. (A) Validation of the expression of JUN at the protein level using the HPA database. (B) Validation of the expression of JUN at the transcriptome level using the TCGA database.
FIGURE 7Component-target-pathway network (A) and molecular docking (B,C). (A) The blue diamonds represent genes. The red circle nodes denote components of SLD, and the yellow V nodes represent CAM-related signaling pathways. (B) Molecular docking results of core targets and active compounds. The color indicates an affinity score. Dark blue represents the lowest affinity score and the highest affinity between receptor and ligand. White represents the highest affinity score and the lowest affinity between receptor and ligand. (C) Optimal complex structure of components and targets.