| Literature DB >> 36245784 |
Ye Shang1,2, Suyi Liu1,2, Chunxiao Liang1,2, Kunze Du1,2, Shujing Chen1,2, Jin Li1, Hua Jin1,3, Yanxu Chang1,2.
Abstract
Pheretima, one of the animal-derived traditional Chinese medicines, has been wildly used in various cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases, including stroke, coronary heart disease, hyperlipidemia, and hyperglycemia. However, it was still a big challenge to select the quality markers for Pheretima quality control. The fingerprint and network pharmacology-based strategy was proposed to screen the efficiency related quality markers (Q-Markers) of Pheretima. The ratio of sample to liquid, ultrasonic-extraction time, temperature, and power were optimized by orthogonal design, respectively. The chemical fingerprint of forty batches of Pheretima was established, and six common peaks were screened. The network pharmacology was used to construct the Pheretima-Components-Targets-Pathways-Stroke network. It was found that six potential efficacy Q-markers in Pheretima could exert the relaxing meridians effect to treat stroke through acting on multiple targets and regulating various pathways. A simple HPLC-DAD method was developed and validated to determine the efficacy Q-markers. Grey relational analysis was used to further verify the relation of potential efficiency related quality markers with the anticoagulation activity of Pheretima, which indicated that the contents of these markers exhibited high relationship with the anticoagulation activity. It was concluded that hypoxanthine, uridine, phenylalanine, inosine, guanosine, and tryptophan were selected as quality markers related to relaxing meridians to evaluate the quality of Pheretima. The fingerprint and network pharmacology-based strategy was proved to be a powerful strategy for the discovery of efficiency related Q-markers of Pheretima.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36245784 PMCID: PMC9553678 DOI: 10.1155/2022/8774913
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Anal Chem ISSN: 1687-8760 Impact factor: 1.698
Optimization of the results of the orthogonal experimental design.
| No. | Ratio of sample to liquid (A, mg/mL) | Extraction time (B, min) | Extraction temperature (C, °C) | Extraction power (D, W) | Total content (mg/g) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10 | 40 | 40 | 220 | 3.6466 |
| 2 | 10 | 50 | 50 | 290 | 3.6795 |
| 3 | 10 | 60 | 60 | 360 | 3.7052 |
| 4 | 20 | 40 | 50 | 360 | 3.1518 |
| 5 | 20 | 50 | 60 | 220 | 3.1720 |
| 6 | 20 | 60 | 40 | 290 | 3.1203 |
| 7 | 30 | 40 | 60 | 290 | 3.0463 |
| 8 | 30 | 50 | 40 | 360 | 2.8356 |
| 9 | 30 | 60 | 50 | 220 | 3.0658 |
| K1 | 3.677 | 3.282 | 3.201 | 3.295 | |
| K2 | 3.148 | 2.229 | 3.299 | 3.282 | |
| K3 | 2.983 | 3.297 | 3.308 | 3.231 | |
| R | 0.694 | 0.068 | 0.107 | 0.064 | |
|
| |||||
| Order |
| ||||
| Optimal level | 10 | 60 | 60 | 220 | |
| Optimal combination | 10 mg/mL, 60 min, 60°C, 220 W | ||||
Note: Ki: the average of each level in each factor; R: the difference between the maximum and minimum levels of each factor.
Figure 1The chemical fingerprint of 40 batches of Pheretima. (1) Hypoxanthine, (2) Uridine, (3) Phenylalanine, (4) Inosine, (5) Guanosine, and (6) Tryptophan.
Figure 2The Venn of six components and stroke targets (a). The PPI network of 51 targets (The size and color represented the degree value. Larger and redder meant a greater degree value and betweenness of nodes and edges) (b). The items of GO enrichment (c). The items of KEGG pathways enrichment (d).
Figure 3The Pheretima-Components-Targets-Pathways-Stroke Network. Square, rhombus, hexagon, vee, and circle represent Pheretima, components, targets, pathways, and stroke, respectively.
Standard curve, correlation coefficient, linear range, LOD, and LOQ of eight analytes.
| Compounds | Regression equation |
| Linearity ranges ( | LOD ( | LOQ ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hypoxanthine |
| 0.9999 | 0.32–80 | 0.04 | 0.13 |
| Uridine |
| 0.9996 | 1.2–60 | 0.19 | 0.50 |
| Phenylalanine |
| 0.9998 | 1.2–300 | 0.24 | 0.79 |
| Adenine |
| 0.9995 | 1.5–100 | 0.44 | 1.21 |
| Inosine |
| 0.9999 | 0.6–150 | 0.17 | 0.58 |
| Guanosine |
| 0.9996 | 1.2–60 | 0.42 | 0.96 |
| Tryptophan |
| 0.9998 | 2.8–140 | 0.32 | 1.14 |
| Adenosine |
| 0.9998 | 1.28–160 | 0.35 | 0.97 |
The results of precision, stability, and repeatability (n = 6).
| Compounds | Precision RSD (%) | Stability RSD (%) | Repeatability RSD (%) | Accuracy | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recovery (%) | RSD (%) | ||||
| Hypoxanthine | 1.49 | 3.46 | 3.71 | 98.1 | 1.97 |
| Uridine | 1.35 | 1.70 | 2.98 | 102 | 2.29 |
| Phenylalanine | 0.52 | 1.38 | 1.21 | 99.2 | 1.51 |
| Adenine | 1.59 | 1.64 | 3.07 | 101 | 1.98 |
| Inosine | 0.36 | 2.26 | 1.29 | 98.4 | 2.06 |
| Guanosine | 2.65 | 2.33 | 2.54 | 102 | 2.15 |
| Tryptophan | 0.82 | 2.37 | 2.58 | 101 | 3.28 |
| Adenosine | 2.85 | 4.38 | 4.95 | 102 | 2.12 |
Figure 4Representative chromatograms of mixed reference standards (a) and Pheretima (b). 1. Hypoxanthine, 2. Uridine, 3. Phenylalanine, 4. Adenine, 5. Inosine, 6. Guanosine, 7. Tryptophan and 8. Adenosine.
Figure 5Total content of 8 targets ingredients in 40 batches Pheretima (a). The heatmap for the contents of Pheretima (“a” representedstronger activity group, “b” represented a lower activity group. The color of the bar represents relative content) (b).
Comparison of the LC method with other methods.
| Sample amounts (g) | Analytes | Type of solvent | Solvent volume (mL) | Extract method | Derivative reagent | Detection method | Detection time (min) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | Aspartic acid, glutamate, serine, glycine, histidine, arginine, threonine, alanine, proline, cysteine, valine, methionine, isoleucine, isoleucine, tyrosine, phenylalanine, lysine | Water | 100 | Soak for 60 min and ultrasonic bath at room temperature for 60 min | Phenyl isothiocyanate, triethylamine | HPLC | 60 | [ |
| 1 | Glycine, alanine, valine, leucine, lysine | Water | 10 | Soak for 12 h and ultrasonic bath at room temperature for 60 min | 2,4-Dinitrofluorobenzene | HPLC | 72 | [ |
| 1 | Hypoxanthine, xanthine, uridine, inosine, guanosine, adenosine | 5% Methanol | 20 | Ultrasonic bath at room temperature for 40 min | — | UPLC | 15 | [ |
| 0.5 | Uracil, hypoxanthine, xanthine, guanosine, inosine, uridine, 2′-deoxyinosine | Water | 25 | Ultrasonic bath at room temperature for 30 min | — | HPLC | 36 | [ |
| 1 | Uracil, hypoxanthine, xanthine, adenosine, inosine | Normal saline | 20 | Soak for 20 min and ultrasonic bath at room temperature for 40 min | — | HPLC | 40 | [ |
| 0.1 | Hypoxanthine, uridine, phenylalanine, adenine, inosine, guanosine, tyrosine, adenosine | Water | 10 | Soak for 10 min and ultrasonic bath at 40 °Cfor 40 min | — | HPLC | 60 | This work |