Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative Study of the Pharmacological Activity of Common Chicory Extracts

  • Published:
Pharmaceutical Chemistry Journal Aims and scope

The pharmacological activities of wild common chicory herb extract and cultivated chicory leaf extract were compared to reveal promising sources of antioxidant, hepatoprotective, and immunomodulatory biologically active substances (BAS). The bioactivities of common chicory extracts were examined in vitro using four specific enzyme bioassay systems (SEBS) based on glutathione reductase (GR) and catalase (CAT), cytochrome P450 and glutathione transferase (GTF), and NADPH-oxidase. The addition of wild common chicory herb extract at a concentration of 3.3 µg/mL to the incubation medium increased the rate of the GR reaction by 91%; of CAT, by 37% as compared to the control. Use of SEBS based on cytochrome P450 and GTF found that the extract of cultivated plant leaves at a concentration of 2.0 µg/mL was less potent than the extract of wild plant herb on the activity of the key enzymes of the biotransformation system. The results were confirmed using a CCl4-induced model of toxic hepatitis in vivo in rats. The experiments used outbred male rats (200 ± 20 g). Use of SEBS based on NADPH-oxidase from rabbit blood leukocytes showed that the extract of cultivated chicory leaves at a concentration of 3.3 µg/mL exhibited more pronounced immunomodulating properties than the extract of the wild plant herb.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. M. Capula, C. Corno, B. E. Hassouni, et al., Anticancer Res., 39(7), 3413 – 3418 (2019); doi: 10.21873 / anticanres.13485.

  2. P. Paoli, Biomolecules, 11(2), 133 (2017); doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/biom11020133.

  3. M. S. Brodova, M. F. Mineeva, and N. B. Doronicheva, Biomed. Tekhnol. Radioelektron., No. 1 – 2, 24 – 30 (2004).

  4. K. Janda, I. Gutowska, M. Geszke-Moritz, and K. Jakubczyk, Molecules, 26(6), 1814 (2021); doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26061814.

  5. O. L. Saybel, A. I. Radimich, G. V. Adamov, et al., Russ. J. Bioorg. Chem., 48(7), 1542 – 1549 (2022); doi: https://doi.org/10.1134/S106816202207024X.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. O. L. Saibel’, Vopr. Obespecheniya Kach. Lek. Sredstv, 32(2), 4 – 11 (2021).

  7. O. L. Saibel?, A. I. Radimich, T. D. Dargaeva, et al., Razrab. Regist. Lek. Sredstv, 10(4), 33 – 42 (2021).

  8. L. B. Strelkova, M. F. Mineeva, and T. V. Topoleva, Khim.- farm. Zh., 41(5), 32 – 36 (2007).

  9. A. N. Mironov (ed.), Handbook for Preclinical Drug Studies [in Russian], Part 1, Grif i K, Moscow (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  10. I. E. Kovalev, N. P. Danikova, and S. A. Andronati, Farmakol. Toksikol., No. 4, 89 – 91 (1986).

  11. O. L. Saibel’, Author’s Abstract of a Doctoral Dissertation in Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ulan-Ude (2022).

  12. S. Elgengaihi, A.-T. H. Mossa, A. A. Refaie, and D. Aboubaker, J. Diet. Suppl., 13(5), 570 – 584 (2016); doi: https://doi.org/10.3109/19390211.2016.1144230.

  13. B. Ahmed, T. A. Al-Howiriny, and A. B. Siddiqui, J. Ethnopharmacol., 87(2 – 3), 237 – 240 (2003); doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-8741(03)00145-4.

  14. V. V. Bortnikova, L. V. Krepkova, A. N. Babenko, et al., Clinical pharmacology in drug development. Abstracts: 2021, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology®, 10 (S1), 100 – 101 (2021); doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/cpdd.1004.

  15. J. H. Kim, Y. J. Mun, W. H. Woo, et al., Int. Immunopharmacol., 2(6), 733 – 744 (2002); doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/s1567-5769(02)00008-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. R. Domitrovic and I. A. Potocnjak, Arch. Toxicol., 90(1), 39 – 79 (2016); doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-015-1580-z.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. All-Russian Research Institute of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (VILAR), 7/1 Grina St., Moscow, 117216, Russia

    I. A. Lupanova & P. G. Mizina

Authors
  1. I. A. Lupanova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. G. Mizina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to I. A. Lupanova.

Additional information

Translated from Khimiko-Farmatsevticheskii Zhurnal, Vol. 57, No. 8, pp. 51 – 58, August, 2023.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lupanova, I.A., Mizina, P.G. Comparative Study of the Pharmacological Activity of Common Chicory Extracts. Pharm Chem J 57, 1277–1283 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11094-024-03035-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11094-024-03035-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation