| Literature DB >> 36192786 |
Rasoul Akbari1,2, Hamid Yaghooti1, Mohammad Taha Jalali1,2, Laya Sadat Khorsandi3, Narges Mohammadtaghvaei4,5.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) has become a global medical problem. Currently, there is no approved pharmacologic treatment for this condition. Previous studies have suggested that in the pathogenesis of this disease, regulatory pathways associated with de novo lipogenesis and β-oxidation pathways genes are misregulated. Capparis spinosa (CS) belongs to the family of Capparidaceae and is a traditional plant used to treat various diseases, particularly dyslipidemia. The compounds and extracts of this plant in In vivo and in vitro studies resulted in a reduction in lipid profiles and glucose. However, the mechanism of these effects remains unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of (CS) fruit extract on NASH compared to fenofibrate and explored the related molecular mechanism.Entities:
Keywords: ACC; CPT1; Capparis spinosa; Fenofibrate; NASH; PPARα; SREBP-1c
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36192786 PMCID: PMC9528135 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-022-06205-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Fig. 1Effect of Capparis spinosa fruit extract and fenofibrate on the body weight (a), liver weight (b), liver index (c), liver TG content (d), sterol regulatory element-binding protein 1c (SREBP1c) (e), acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACC) (f), peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α (PPARα) (g), carnitine palmitoyltransferase 1 (CPT1) (h) mRNA expression in NASH model rats during 12 weeks of treatment. Bars represent the mean ± SD of the variables in each group (n = 8). NC, normal control; HF, high fat; CS, Capparis spinosa; FENO, fenofibrate. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001 and ns: nonsignificant. I Significantly different from NC at end of week 6; II Significantly different from NC after 12 weeks and III significantly different between NC, HF + FENO, and HF + CS vs. HF at end of week 12 (p < 0.001)
Effect of daily administration of CS (20 mg/kg) and fenofibrate (100 mg/kg) on Serum biochemistry parameters of fatty liver rats
| Parameters | NC | HF | HF + FENO | HF + CS | P-Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HF VS. NC | HF + FENO VS. HF | HF + CS VS. HF | HF + CS VS. HF + FENO | |||||
| AST (U/L) | 36.21 ± 4.15 | 91.00 ± 18.06 | 73.41 ± 7.14 | 47.00 ± 5.11 | < 0.001 | 0.0117 | < 0. 001 | 0. 002 |
| ALT (U/L) | 28.75 ± 3.93 | 73.12 ± 6.43 | 51.68 ± 11.17 | 38.38 ± 5.72 | < 0.001 | 0.0047 | < 0. 001 | 0.0244 |
| TG (mg/dl) | 44.57 ± 8.14 | 115.10 ± 16.32 | 38.29 ± 09.66 | 48.25 ± 07.13 | < 0.001 | < 0. 001 | < 0. 001 | ns |
| TC (mg/dl) | 71.57 ± 2.63 | 125.12 ± 7.59 | 83.37 ± 11.04 | 82.44 ± 7.90 | < 0.001 | < 0. 001 | < 0. 001 | ns |
| HDL-c (mg/dl) | 44.00 ± 2.82 | 27.71 ± 5.03 | 32.86 ± 7.84 | 37.75 ± 4.68 | < 0.001 | ns | 0.0071 | ns |
| LDL-c (mg/dl) | 25.66 ± 3.33 | 71.40 ± 7.25 | 48.06 ± 11.57 | 35.83 ± 6.51 | < 0.001 | < 0. 001 | < 0. 001 | 0.0041 |
| FFA (mg/dl) | 9.99 ± 3.04 | 29.52 ± 4.37 | 36.63 ± 6.08 | 19.86 ± 4.01 | < 0.001 | < 0. 001 | 0.0014 | < 0. 001 |
| FBG (mg/dl) | 105.70 ± 7.54 | 254.30 ± 8.95 | 160.1 ± 20.22 | 120.10 ± 8.72 | < 0.001 | < 0. 001 | < 0. 001 | < 0. 001 |
| Insulin (mIU/L) | 3.68 ± 1.07 | 3.079 ± 1.088 | 5.744 ± 0.79 | 3.327 ± 1.53 | ns | 0.0012 | ns | 0.0033 |
| HOMA-IR | 0.96 ± 0.26 | 1.925 ± 0.68 | 2.268 ± 0.41 | 1.04 ± 0.49 | 0.0059 | ns | 0.0130 | 0. 005 |
Values are expressed as the mean ± SD of parameters analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc tests (n = 7 in each group)
AST aspartate aminotransferase, ALT alanine aminotransferase, TG triacylglycerol, TC total cholesterol, HDL-c high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, LDL-c low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, FFA free fatty acid, FBS fasting blood glucose, HOMA-IR homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance, NC normal control, HF high fat, CS capparis spinosa, FENO fenofibrate
Fig. 2Upper panel: Macroscopic observation of the livers of the HF group showed a grossly larger and beige in color compared with the NC group. Lower panel: Representative images of hematoxylin–eosin-stained sections of liver tissue in different groups at the end of treatments with 100X magnification. A: accumulation of RBCs; I: inflammation; S: steatosis. NC normal control, HF high fat, CS Capparis spinose, FENO fenofibrate