Cargando…

Protective effect of paeoniflorin in diabetic nephropathy: A preclinical systematic review revealing the mechanism of action

BACKGROUND: Paeoniflorin (PF), the main active glucoside of Paeonia Lactiflora, has many pharmacological activities, such as inhibition of vasodilation, hypoglycemia, and immunomodulation. Although the current evidence has suggested the therapeutic effects of PF on diabetic nephropathy (DN), its pot...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Xue-Er, Pang, Yao-bin, Bo, Qu, Hu, Shuang-Yuan, Xiang, Ju-Yi, Yang, Zheng-Ru, Zhang, Xiao-Mei, Chen, An-Jing, Zeng, Jin-Hao, Ma, Xiao, Guo, Jing
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10513216/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37733659
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282275
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Paeoniflorin (PF), the main active glucoside of Paeonia Lactiflora, has many pharmacological activities, such as inhibition of vasodilation, hypoglycemia, and immunomodulation. Although the current evidence has suggested the therapeutic effects of PF on diabetic nephropathy (DN), its potential mechanism of action is still unclear. PURPOSE: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing literature on paeoniflorin treatment in DN animal models was performed to evaluate the efficacy and mechanism of PF in DN animal models. METHODS: The risk of bias in each study was judged using the CAMARADES 10-item quality checklist with the number of criteria met varying from 4 / 10 to 7 / 10, with an average of 5.44. From inception to July 2022, We searched eight databases. We used the Cochrane Collaboration’s 10-item checklist and RevMan 5.3 software to assess the risk of bias and analyze the data. Three-dimensional dose/time-effect analyses were conducted to examine the dosage/time-response relations between PF and DN. RESULTS: Nine animal studies were systematically reviewed to evaluate the effectiveness of PF in improving animal models of DN. Meta-analysis data and intergroup comparisons indicated that PF slowed the index of mesangial expansion and tubulointerstitial injury, 24-h urinary protein excretion rate, expression of anti-inflammatory mediators (mRNA of MCP-1, TNF-α, iNOS, and IL-1 β), and expression of immune downstream factors (P-IRAK1, TIRF, P-IRF3, MyD88, and NF-κBp-p65). Furthermore, modeling methods, animal species, treatment duration, thickness of tissue sections during the experiment, and experimental procedures were subjected to subgroup analyses. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated that the reno-protective effects of PF were associated with its inhibition on macrophage infiltration, reduction of inflammatory mediators, and immunomodulatory effects. In conclusion, PF can effectively slow down the progression of DN and hold promise as a protective drug for the treatment of DN. Due to the low bioavailability of PF, further studies on renal histology in animals are urgently needed. We therefore recommend an active exploration of the dose and therapeutic time frame of PF in the clinic and in animals. Moreover, it is suggested to actively explore methods to improve the bioavailability of PF to expand the application of PF in the clinic.