| Literature DB >> 36235503 |
Sofia Encarnação1, Cristina de Mello-Sampayo1, Belmira Carrapiço2, Berta São Braz2, Ana Patrícia Jordão3, Conceição Peleteiro2, Luís Catarino4, Isabel B Moreira da Silva1, Luís F Gouveia1, Beatriz Silva Lima1, Olga Silva1.
Abstract
Anacardium occidentale L. is used throughout the world to treat type 2 diabetes. In Portugal, a traditional herbal preparation made with stem bark of this species (AoBTHP) has been used for more than 30 years to treat this pathology. The AoBTHP was standardized on total phenolic content, and its hypoglycemic activity was assessed using db/db mice (n = 26) for 92 days. Three doses (40.2, 71.5, and 127.0 mg/kg/day, per os) were tested, and glibenclamide (5 mg/kg/day) was used as positive control. During the study, glycemia was measured under non-fasting or fasting states. In sequence, thin-layer chromatography bioautographic assays were used for the detection of possible alpha- and beta-glucosidase inhibitors. A significant hypoglycemic effect in fasting glycemia in days 31 and 57 was observed with the three tested doses. The 71.5 mg/kg and 127.0 mg/kg AoBTHPs significantly reduced non-fasting glycemia on day 24. The highest dose showed the most significant hypoglycemic effect. Gallic acid was identified as the major alpha- and beta-glucosidase inhibitor. The 127 mg/kg/day AoBTHP dose showed a greater glucose-lowering effect than glibenclamide. For the first time, a standardized AoBTHP was tested using an in vivo diabetes model, and its usage was preclinically validated for type 2 diabetes treatment. The hypoglycemic activity of an AoBTHP can be related to the presence of alpha- and beta-glucosidase inhibitors, such as gallic acid, but other mechanisms can also be involved.Entities:
Keywords: Anacardium occidentale; alpha-glucosidase inhibitors; antidiabetic; db/db mice; gallic acid; herbal medicines
Year: 2022 PMID: 36235503 PMCID: PMC9571383 DOI: 10.3390/plants11192637
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
A. occidentale stem bark hypoglycemic activity in vivo studies.
| Type of Extraction | Extract Dose and Route of Administration | Duration of Study | Positive Control | Animal Model | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Methanol, | 100–800 mg/kg | 24 h; | Insulin 5 UI/kg s.c.; glibenclamide | Streptozotocin | [ |
| Hexane | 20 and 30 mg/kg i.v. | 2 h | ----- | Healthy | [ |
| Methanol | 200 mg/kg | 21 days | ----- | Fructose 25% | [ |
| Hexane | 300 mg/kg | 2 h | ----- | Healthy | [ |
| Hydroethanol (80%) | 500 mg/kg | 28 days | Insulin 5 IU/kg | Streptozotocin | [ |
| Ethanol | 300 and 500 mg/kg | 28 days | ----- | Streptozotocin | [ |
i.p.—intraperitoneal; i.v.—intravenous; p.o.—per os; s.c.—subcutaneous.
Figure 1Representative HPLC-UV/DAD chromatographic profile for the AoBTHP. 1: gallic acid; 2: protocatechuic acid; 3: ellagic acid.
Weekly mean body weight per group of animals during the study (mean ± SEM).
| Week | Negative Control | Positive Control | AoBTHP mg/kg/Day | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40.2 | 71.5 | 127.0 | |||
| 0 | 40.0 ± 1.8 | 38.2 ± 2.6 | 37.9 ± 3.1 | 38.3 ± 2.0 | 37.4 ± 1.9 |
| 1 to 3 | 39.4 ± 1.5 | 36.4 ± 2.7 | 37.3 ± 2.9 | 37.2 ± 1.6 | 36.2 ± 1.8 |
| 4 to 6 | 41.8 ± 2.1 | 37.2 ± 2.0 | 38.9 ± 2.6 | 39.5 ± 1.3 | 37.5 ± 1.0 |
| 7 to 9 | 43.2 ± 2.6 | 38.0 ± 1.8 | 39.9 ± 2.3 | 39.6 ± 0.8 | 39.7 ± 1.1 |
| 10 to 12 | 44.8 ± 2.4 | 39.2 ± 1.9 | 41.2 ± 2.6 | 40.1 ± 1.0 | 40.8 ± 1.2 |
| 13 | 47.2 ± 2.7 | 41.6 ± 2.2 | 42.6 ± 2.7 | 42.1 ± 1.3 | 41.9 ± 1.1 |
There were no statistically significant differences between all groups (p < 0.05).
Figure 2(a) Mean food consumption relative to average body weight per group of animals during the study (g/kg bw/day); (b) mean water consumption relative to average body weight per group of animals during the study (ml/kg bw/day). *** p < 0.001 vs. negative control; **** p < 0.0001 vs. negative control.
Non-fasting glycemia values of animals (mean ± SEM).
| Day | Negative Control | Positive Control | AoBTHP mg/kg/Day | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40.2 | 71.5 | 127.0 | |||
| 0 | 586 ± 23 | 582 ± 34 | 552 ±30 | 576 ± 27 | 578 ± 31 |
| 24 | 527 ± 37 | 486 ± 19 # | 524 ± 23 | 486 ± 15 † | 487 ± 9 ** |
| 43 | 591 ± 34 | 612 ± 21 | 545 ± 36 | 565 ± 32 | 510 ± 17 * |
| 71 | 633 ± 15 | 634 ± 14 | 602 ± 23 | 618 ± 22 | 581 ± 21 |
# p < 0.05 vs. Positive control in day 0; † p < 0.05 vs. 71.5 mg/kg/day AoBTHP in day 0; * p < 0.05 vs. 127.0 mg/kg/day AoBTHP in day 0; ** p < 0.01 vs. 127.0 mg/kg/day AoBTHP in day 0.
Fasting glycemia values of animals (mean ± SEM).
| Day | Negative Control | Positive Control | AoBTHP mg/kg/Day | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40.2 | 71.5 | 127.0 | |||
| 8 | 498 ± 14 | 491 ± 34 | 466 ± 18 | 496 ± 21 | 545 ± 16 |
| 31 | 540 ± 37 | 447 ± 9 ** | 449 ± 39 ** | 442 ± 30 ** | 394 ± 18 **** |
| 57 | 568 ± 28 | 492 ± 7 * | 492 ± 12 * | 486 ± 16 * | 476 ± 13 ** |
* p < 0.05 vs. negative control; ** p < 0.01 vs. negative control; **** p < 0.0001 vs. negative control.
Figure 3(a) Non-fasting glycemia values; (b) fasting glycemia values of control groups and 127.0 mg/kg AoBTHP. * p < 0.05 vs. negative control, ** p < 0.01 vs. negative control, *** p < 0.0001 vs. negative control.
Biochemical parameters of sacrificed animals (mean ± SEM).
| Biochemical Parameter | Negative Control | Positive Control | AoBTHP mg/kg/Day | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40.2 | 71.5 | 127.0 | |||
| ALT (I.U/L) | 122 ± 27 | 119 ± 18 | 150 ± 54 | 123 ± 20 | 139 ± 48 |
| AST (I.U/L) | 277 ± 96 | 320 ± 105 | 584 ± 158 | 414 ± 84 | 338 ± 85 |
| Cholesterol | 172 ± 44 | 134 ± 39 | 142 ± 29 | 175 ± 49 | 149 ± 0.0 |
| Serum creatinine (mg/dL) | 0.1 ± 0.0 | 0.1 ± 0.1 | 0.4 ± 0.3 | 0.1 ± 0.1 | 0.0 ± 0.0 |
| Serum urea (mg/dL) | 27 ± 3.0 | 21 ± 3.0 | 50 ± 27 | 27 ± 4.0 | 21 ± 1.0 |
| Triglycerides (mg/dL) | 301 ± 45 | 282 ± 57 | 323 ± 52 | 225 ± 65 | 257 ± 41 |
ALT: alanine transaminase; AST: aspartate transaminase. There were no statistically significant differences among all groups (p < 0.05).
Relative organ weights collected for each group of animals sacrificed—percentage g/g of body weight (mean ± SEM).
| Organ | Negative Control | Positive Control | AoBTHP mg/kg/Day | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40.2 | 71.5 | 127.0 | |||
| Heart | 0.24 ± 0.01 | 0.28 ± 0.01 | 0.20 ± 0.06 | 0.28 ± 0.01 | 0.25 ± 0.01 |
| Kidneys | 0.90 ± 0.03 | 1.05 ± 0.06 | 0.96 ± 0.09 | 0.88 ± 0.04 | 0.87 ± 0.02 |
| Liver | 6.24 ± 0.17 | 6.10 ± 0.14 | 5.63 ± 0.51 | 5.74 ± 0.38 | 5.57 ± 0.29 |
| Pancreas | 0.42 ± 0.06 | 0.39 ± 0.12 | 0.32 ± 0.05 | 0.38 ± 0.03 | 0.35 ± 0.03 |
| Spleen | 0.18 ± 0.03 | 0.10 ± 0.01 | 0.10 ± 0.01 | 0.15 ± 0.03 | 0.10 ± 0.01 |
There were no statistically significant differences among all groups (p < 0.05).
Figure 4Histopathological analysis in tissues. (a) Liver section revealing more pronounced hepatocyte vacuolation in the centrilobular region from a mouse treated with 40.2 mg/kg AoBTHP (40× magnification, hematoxylin, and eosin staining). (b) Pancreas section showing foci of necrotic adipocytes, with discrete inflammatory infiltration contiguous with areas of neutrophilic cellular infiltration, at the periphery of a pancreatic lobe from a mouse treated with 127.0 mg/kg AoBTHP (100× magnification, hematoxylin and eosin staining). (c) Glomerular section with a basement membrane with normal thickness and mesangial cell nuclei in normal number, from a mouse treated with 127.0 mg/kg AoBTHP (400× magnification, periodic acid-Schiff staining). Scale bars: A = 200 µm; B = 100 µm; C = 20 µm.