Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to clarify the anti-osteoporosis mechanism of Cnidii Fructus (CF) via network pharmacology and experimental verification.
Methods: HPLC fingerprints combined with HPLC-Q-TOF-MS/MS analysis confirmed common components (CCS) of CF. Then, network pharmacology was used to investigate the anti-OP mechanism of CF, including potential anti-OP phytochemicals, potential targets, and related signalling pathway. Molecular docking analysis was carried on investigating the protein-ligand interactions. Finally, in vitro experiments were performed to verify anti-OP mechanism of CF.
Results: In this study, 17 compounds from CF were identified by HPLC-Q-TOF-MS/MS and HPLC fingerprints and then were further screened key compounds and potential targets by PPI analysis, ingredient-target network and hub network. The key compounds were SCZ10 (Diosmin), SCZ16 (Pabulenol), SCZ6 (Osthenol), SCZ8 (Bergaptol) and SCZ4 (Xanthotoxol). The potential targets were SRC, MAPK1, PIK3CA, AKT1 and HSP90AA1. Molecular docking further analysis indicated that the five key compounds have a good binding affinity with related proteins. CCK8 assays, TRAP staining experiments, and ALP activity assays concluded that osthenol and bergaptol inhibited osteoclast formation and promoted osteoblast bone formation to improve osteoporosis.
Conclusion: Based on network pharmacology and in vitro experiments analysis, this study revealed that CF possessed an anti-OP effect, and its potential therapeutic effect may be involved with osthenol and bergaptol from CF.
Graphical Abstract
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2016.69] [PMID: 27681935]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1210/endrev/bnab028] [PMID: 34476488]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-017-1403-x]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/PL00004171] [PMID: 10550467]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s001980200129] [PMID: 12459934]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1210/er.2001-9002] [PMID: 12202472]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2021.774414] [PMID: 34803715]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0031-9422(01)00238-2] [PMID: 11576615]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fitote.2011.03.008] [PMID: 21504784]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms21031006] [PMID: 32028721]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-2006-951724] [PMID: 17315308]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2018.12.112]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2021.675396] [PMID: 34025435]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms23105400] [PMID: 35628212]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2019.109777] [PMID: 31918261]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2017.5170] [PMID: 29201170]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules24071439] [PMID: 30979075]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules22101756] [PMID: 29048378]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules24050940] [PMID: 30866532]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.07.173] [PMID: 30309597]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pca.2902] [PMID: 31908072]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.05.013] [PMID: 23870916]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.02.068] [PMID: 23768368]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.128400]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00498254.2019.1705427] [PMID: 31847686]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pca.2496] [PMID: 24481589]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1674-6384(16)60058-8]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2021.114602]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.1c04825] [PMID: 34723038]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M502271200] [PMID: 15923189]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocel.2006.05.018] [PMID: 16893669]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10799893.2019.1625061] [PMID: 31210570]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1574888X17666220426120850] [PMID: 35473519]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2006.12.016] [PMID: 17362777]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2020.585056] [PMID: 33324677]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejphar.2017.03.001] [PMID: 28283388]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0192415X19500228] [PMID: 30827151]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/aps.2015.85] [PMID: 26592521]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2220/biomedres.42.13] [PMID: 33563875]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2021.657953] [PMID: 34054729]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2019.10040] [PMID: 30896842]