Abstract
Stryphnodendron adstringens has a high tannin content and is used as an antiseptic and antimicrobial and in the treatment of leucorrhea, gonorrhea, wound healing, and gastritis. The present study evaluated the toxic effects of the heptamer prodelphinidin (F2) from the stem bark of S. adstringens in rodents. In the acute toxicity test, the mice that received oral doses exhibited reversible effects, with an LD50 of 3.015 mg · kg−1. In the chronic toxicity test at 90 days, Wistar rats were treated with different doses of F2 (10, 100, and 200 mg · kg−1). In the biochemical, hematological, and histopathological examinations and open-field test, the different dose groups did not exhibit significant differences compared with controls. The present results indicate that F2 from the stem bark of S. adstringens caused no toxicity with acute and chronic oral treatment in rodents at the doses administered.
1. Introduction
The bioactivity of various compounds in medicinal plants has been assessed. These compounds are isolated and analyzed to determine biological activity, mechanisms of action, and toxicity [1, 2]. The genus Stryphnodendron sp belongs to the family Fabaceae (native savanna), approximately 48 species of which have been identified, including Stryphnodendron adstringens (Mart.) Coville (known as “barbatimão”). This species is found in the central savannah region of Brazil [3–5]. This plant is popularly used as an antiseptic and antimicrobial and in the treatment of leucorrhea, gonorrhea, gastritis, diarrhea, bleeding, and wound healing [6–9]. Scientific research has shown that it has antiulcerogenic potential, antiprotozoan activity, anti-inflammatory effects, antimicrobial activity, and wound healing effects [6, 10–18].
The bark of S. adstringens is rich in proanthocyanidin polymers, including several flavan-3-ols, such as prodelphinidins and prorobinetinidins [19–22]. The chemical composition of prodelphinidin (F2) has been partially defined as a heptamer compound [16].
The toxicity of S. adstringens was the subject of a study by Rebecca et al. [23, 24]. The crude extract of stem bark was administered at high doses in mice and tested in liver mitochondria, showing signs of liver toxicity. Other studies have been conducted with other parts of the plant [25, 26]. Studies by De Sousa et al. [27] and Costa et al. [28] showed that S. adstringens had no genotoxic effects in Drosophila melanogaster or micronuclei (bone marrow) and Artemia salina tests in mice, respectively.
Thus, considering the wide use of this plant and that few studies have been conducted to determine the toxicological profile of S. adstringens, the present study sought to obtain more information about toxicity at therapeutic doses.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Plant Material
Stem bark from Stryphnodendron adstringens was collected in São Jerônimo da Serra, Paraná, Brazil (S23°43′7.8′′, W50°45′23.5′′; altitude 926 m), in March 2008. A voucher herbarium specimen was deposited at the Universidade Estadual de Maringá (no. HUM 14321).
2.2. Aqueous Fraction
The bark was dried at room temperature and then pulverized. The crude extract was obtained by turboextraction of the bark at 1,000 ×g with 70% acetone in water for 15 min. The organic solvent was eliminated by rotavapor and lyophilized to yield a crude extract (F1; 300 g). F1 (50 g) was suspended in water (500 mL) and partitioned with ethyl acetate (500 mL; 1 : 1) to obtain a proanthocyanidin polymer-rich fraction (aqueous fraction; F2; 35 g).
2.3. Animals
Adult Wistar rats (90 days old), weighing 230–240 g (female) and 355–365 g (male), and Swiss mice (60 days old), weighing 35–45 g (female) and 45–60 g (male), were used and housed in groups of five per cage, with food and water freely available. The animals were maintained on a 12 h/12 h light/dark cycle under controlled temperature (22 ± 1°C). The protocol was approved by the Ethical Committee of the State University of Maringá (Approval no. 026/2009).
2.4. Toxicity Studies
The toxicity studies were performed according to the Brazilian National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA) [29–32].
2.4.1. Acute Toxicity Study in Mice
Swiss mice were divided into seven groups, with 10 animals per group (five males and five females). Six groups were orally treated by gavage with different doses of F2 (500, 1,000, 2,000, 3,000, 4,000, and 5,000 mg·kg−1). One group that received distilled water was included as a negative control. The volume administered by gavage in the mice was approximately 0.3 mL per animal. Water and food were freely available to the animals. The general behavior and number of survivors were observed at 5 min, 15 min, 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, 4 h, and 24 h and daily thereafter until day 14. Toxicological effects were assessed, including changes in locomotion, respiration, piloerection, diarrhea, drooling, altered muscle tone, hypnosis, convulsions, hyperexcitability, writhing (abdominal constrictions), and mortality (which is expressed as the median lethal dose [LD50]) [33]. From the 24th hour until day 14, the weights of the animals were recorded.
At the end of this period, all of the animals were sacrificed. The kidneys, heart, lungs, spleen, and liver were removed, weighed, and evaluated for macroscopic abnormalities. When changes were observed in the autopsies, further histological examination of the organs was performed.
2.4.2. Repeated-Dose Oral Toxicity Study in Rats
Wistar rats were divided into four groups (11 males and 11 females). One group served as the control and received only water. The other groups received F2 of S. adstringens (10, 100, or 200 mg·kg−1) suspended in water and administered orally by gavage daily for 90 days. The volume administered by gavage in the rats was approximately 0.5 mL per animal. The choice of the doses was based on the estimated oral dose in popular use (10 mg·kg−1) [34] and 10- and 20-times the effective dose [29, 30].
All of the animals received food and water ad libitum during the treatment. They were observed daily with regard to behavior and weighed weekly. At the end of the 90-day period, the animals were deprived of food for 15 h and then sacrificed. Their blood was collected for biochemical and hematological examination. The organs were carefully dissected and removed for weighing, macroscopic examination, and histopathological analysis.
Blood Analysis. Biochemical analyses were performed to determine glucose, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), total protein, creatinine, uric acid, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), triglycerides, total cholesterol, γ-glutamyltransferase (γ-GT), bilirubin, sodium, and potassium. These were evaluated using the Dimension RXL Max system (Siemens).
Hematological analyses were performed using the automatic counter Pentra 60 ABX (ABX Diagnostics) to evaluate the following parameters: erythrocyte count (red blood cells (RBCs)), hemoglobin, hematocrit, mean corpuscular volume (MCV), mean corpuscular hemoglobin (MCH), mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (MCHC), platelet count, and leucocyte count (white blood cells (WBCs)). Differential WBC counts (nonsegmented neutrophils, segmented neutrophils, basophils, eosinophils, lymphocytes, and monocytes) were made using a glass-slide method. Immediately after collection, blood smears were air-dried and stained with Leishman's stain. One hundred cells were randomly counted in each smear, and the percentage of each type was calculated. Any morphological change in the blood cells was noted.
Organ Weights and Histopathological Analyses. The organs (thymus, esophagus, stomach, duodenum, lung, heart, kidneys, liver, spleen, adrenals, and sex organs) of all of the animals were examined macroscopically. The positions, shapes, sizes, and colors of the internal organs were visually observed for signs of macroscopic abnormalities. The organs were weighed and fixed in Bouin's fixative and preserved in 70% ethanol. For the 200 mg·kg−1 dose of F2 and controls, tissue slides were prepared and stained with hematoxylin and eosin for microscopic examination.
Open-Field Test (OFT). Locomotor behavior was assessed on day 86 of treatment in the open-field test. Each animal was placed in a round wooden arena (70 cm diameter) with 30 cm high walls. Luminosity at the center of the open field was 60 lux during a 5-min period. Rearing, self-cleaning, urination, the number of fecal pellets, and locomotion were recorded [35]. For the evaluation of locomotion, the total distance traveled was analyzed using a video tracking system (Ethovision).
2.5. Statistical Analyses
The results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD). The data were analyzed using Statistica 8.0 software. The statistical analyses were performed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by the Dunnett post hoc test. When the variance was not constant, the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to determine significant differences. The histopathological results were analyzed using Fisher's exact test. Differences were considered significant at P ≤ 0.05.
3. Results
3.1. Acute Toxicity Study in Mice
The effects are summarized in Table 1. The doses of 500 and 1,000 mg·kg−1 showed no signs of toxicity. Only the 2,000 mg·kg−1 dose caused signs of toxicity, beginning with diarrhea and piloerection. At doses of 3,000–5,000 mg·kg−1, hypoactivity, hyperventilation, ptosis, hypothermia, motor impairment, sedation, and catatonia were observed, all of which were reversible after 48 h. Death occurred in the groups that received 2,000–5,000 mg·kg−1, resulting in an LD50 of 3,015 mg·kg−1. All of the groups had lower body weights in the first 24 h. After 7 days, however, body weights recovered (Figure 1). With regard to the weights of the organs, only the liver showed a decrease at doses of 4,000 and 5,000 mg·kg−1 (Table 2). In the macroscopic and histopathological analyses, no changes were observed at lower doses. Only liver tissue damage was observed at the 5,000 mg·kg−1 dose.
Table 1.
Acute toxicity of F2 of Stryphnodendron adstringens administered orally in mice.
| F2 S. adstringens | Observed changes | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| dose (mg·kg−1) | No. of deaths | Diarrhea | Piloerection | Hypoactivity | Hyperventilation | Ptosis | Hypothermia | Motor impairment | Catatonia | Hypnosis/sedation |
| Control | 0 | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No |
| 500 | 0 | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No |
| 1,000 | 0 | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No |
| 2,000 | 2 | Reversible after 8 h (2) | Reversible after 72 h (5) | No | No | No | No | No | No | No |
| 3,000 | 7 | Reversible after 8 h (1) | Reversible after 7 d (6) |
Reversible after 48 h (4) |
Reversible after 48 h (2) |
Reversible after 48 h (1) |
Reversible after 48 h (1) |
Reversible after 48 h (1) | No | No |
| 4,000 | 9 | Reversible after 8 h (6) | Reversible after 7 d (12) |
Reversible after 48 h (9) |
Reversible after 4 h (2) |
No | Reversible after 48 h (4) |
No | Reversible after 1 h (1) | No |
| 5,000 | 11 | Reversible after 48 h (6) | Reversible after at 14 d (10) | Reversible after 48 h (5) |
Reversible after 12 h (8) |
Reversible after 48 h (1) | Reversible after 48 h (4) |
Reversible after 1 h (1) |
No | Reversible after 12 h (1) |
No: no toxic symptoms observed. The numbers in parentheses indicate the number of animals that showed the changes. The mice were observed daily for signs of toxicity (behavioral changes and mortality) for 14 days.
Figure 1.
Body weight gain (g) in female mice (a) and male mice (b) treated orally with 500, 1,000, 2,000, 3,000, 4,000, and 5,000 mg·kg−1 F2 in the acute toxicity study.
Table 2.
Effect of F2 of Stryphnodendron adstringens on the weights of organs of mice.
| Organs | F2 S. adstringens (mg·kg−1) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 500 | 1,000 | 2,000 | 3,000 | 4,000 | 5,000 | |
| Male | |||||||
| Liver | 3.27 ± 0.4 | 2.57 ± 0.3 | 2.87 ± 0.2 | 2.75 ± 0.3 | 2.58 ± 0.2 | 2.32 ± 0.3* | 2.45 ± 0.6* |
| Spleen | 0.31 ± 0.04 | 0.24 ± 0.02 | 0.27 ± 0.06 | 0.30 ± 0.07 | 0.20 ± 0.05 | 0.20 ± 0.03 | 0.20 ± 0.06 |
| Lungs | 0.48 ± 0.01 | 0.35 ± 0.03 | 0.40 ± 0.04 | 0.35 ± 0.04 | 0.46 ± 0.11 | 0.39 ± 0.06 | 0.46 ± 0.16 |
| Heart | 0.31 ± 0.03 | 0.25 ± 0.04 | 0.27 ± 0.04 | 0.28 ± 0.04 | 0.34 ± 0.05 | 0.29 ± 0.07 | 0.32 ± 0.04 |
| Kidneys | 0.95 ± 0.09 | 0.67 ± 0.05 | 0.82 ± 0.05 | 0.70 ± 0.09 | 0.81 ± 0.06 | 0.64 ± 0.10 | 0.72 ± 0.12 |
| Female | |||||||
| Liver | 2.22 ± 0.3 | 1.94 ± 0.2 | 2.04 ± 0.3 | 1.93 ± 0.3 | 1.98 ± 0.5 | 1.92 ± 0.4* | 1.68 ± 0.2* |
| Spleen | 0.25 ± 0.04 | 0.20 ± 0.06 | 0.28 ± 0.06 | 0.29 ± 0.09 | 0.24 ± 0.07 | 0.26 ± 0.08 | 0.19 ± 0.03 |
| Lungs | 0.38 ± 0.07 | 0.32 ± 0.06 | 0.33 ± 0.04 | 0.36 ± 0.07 | 0.43 ± 0.15 | 0.50 ± 0.15 | 0.47 ± 0.14 |
| Heart | 0.20 ± 0.04 | 0.17 ± 0.04 | 0.21 ± 0.06 | 0.24 ± 0.03 | 0.25 ± 0.07 | 0.25 ± 0.06 | 0.19 ± 0.03 |
| Kidneys | 0.51 ± 0.06 | 0.44 ± 0.08 | 0.49 ± 0.03 | 0.55 ± 0.07 | 0.52 ± 0.07 | 0.51 ± 0.09 | 0.49 ± 0.03 |
Values expressed as mean ± DP (standard deviation). ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis tests. *P < 0.05 compared to control.
3.2. Repeated-Dose Oral Toxicity Study in Rats
3.2.1. Behavior and Body Weight Gain
During treatment, no signs of toxicity were observed in the animals. Body weight gain as a function of time is shown in Figures 2 and 3. All of the groups showed weight gain compared with their initial weight, with the exception of the 100 mg·kg−1 dose in females. Furthermore, the doses of 100 and 200 mg·kg−1 in males and 100 mg·kg−1 in females caused less weight gain compared with controls (Figures 2 and 3; Table 3).
Figure 2.
Body weight gain (g) in male rats (a) and female rats (b) treated orally for 90 days with F2 of S. adstringens (10, 100, and 200 mg·kg−1) and controls. a P < 0.05, compared with initial values; b P < 0.05, compared with control values (ANOVA).
Figure 3.
Body weight (g) in male rats (a) and female rats (b) treated orally for 90 days with F2 of S. adstringens (10 mg·kg−1 ●, 100 mg·kg−1 ▲, and 200 mg·kg−1 ■) and controls (♦). a P < 0.05, compared with initial values; b P < 0.05, compared with controls (ANOVA).
Table 3.
Percentage of weight gain in the animals after 90 days of treatment with the aqueous fraction (F2) of S. adstringens.
| Groups | Weight gain (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | |
| Control | 26.2 ± 3.3 | 20.8 ± 4.3 |
| 10 mg·kg−1 | 22.7 ± 6.2 | 15.5 ± 4.2 |
| 100 mg·kg−1 | 18.4 ± 6.9* | 12.8 ± 5.5* |
| 200 mg·kg−1 | 15.2 ± 5.6* | 14.8 ± 3.9 |
*Values are mean ± S.E.M. ANOVA test. *P < 0.05 compared to the control group.
3.2.2. Biochemical Analyses
The effects of F2 of S. adstringens on biochemical profiles showed specific changes (Table 4). In male rats, some parameters were significantly increased compared with the control group, including potassium (10.7 ± 2.4 mEq·L−1 at 100 mg·kg−1), uric acid (2.7 ± 1.1 and 2.0 ± 0.8 mg·dL−1 at 100 and 200 mg·kg−1, resp.), and AST (186.0 ± 47.0 U·L−1 at 100 mg·kg−1). Other parameters were significantly decreased, including triglyceride (85.5 ± 28.3 mg·dL−1 at 200 mg·kg−1) and creatinine (0.4 ± 0.1 mg·dL−1 at 100 mg·kg−1). In female rats, only triglycerides (58.9 ± 12.5 and 72.7 ± 21.3 mg·dL−1 at 100 and 200 mg·kg−1, resp.) were significantly decreased compared with the control group.
Table 4.
Biochemical parameters in male and female rats orally treated with F2 of S. adstringens for 90 days.
| Parameters | Controls | F2 (mg·kg−1) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | 100 | 200 | ||
| Male | ||||
| Sodium (mEq·L−1) | 142.2 ± 5.0 | 144.5 ± 1.6 | 142.1 ± 3.3 | 141.7 ± 2.7 |
| Potassium (mEq·L−1) | 6.3 ± 0.4 | 7.3 ± 0.4 | 10.7 ± 2.4* | 7.5 ± 1.2 |
| Glucose (mg·dL−1) | 122.6 ± 11.6 | 127.9 ± 12.5 | 129.4 ± 15.5 | 123.4 ± 29.0 |
| Triglyceride (mg·dL−1) | 119.9 ± 23.4 | 134.5 ± 23.4 | 95.7 ± 23.5 | 85.5 ± 28.3* |
| Cholesterol (mg·dL−1) | 99.3 ± 13.9 | 104.5 ± 19.1 | 97.1 ± 10.2 | 92.7 ± 21.1 |
| Uric acid (mg·dL−1) | 1.2 ± 0.2 | 1.5 ± 0.2 | 2.7 ± 1.1* | 2.0 ± 0.8* |
| ALP (U·L−1) | 76.0 ± 18.3 | 68.4 ± 9.6 | 84.0 ± 15.8 | 89.2 ± 13.0 |
| AST (U·L−1) | 106.7 ± 19.5 | 148.6 ± 26.3 | 186.0 ± 47.0* | 151.4 ± 67.0 |
| ALT (U·L−1) | 56.6 ± 7.7 | 60.9 ± 12.7 | 90.0 ± 26.1 | 62.3 ± 13.0 |
| Total protein (g/dL) | 6.5 ± 0.6 | 6.4 ± 0.2 | 6.8 ± 0.3 | 6.9 ± 0.5 |
| Total bilirubin (mg·dL−1) | 0.11 ± 0.02 | 0.07 ± 0.04 | 0.11 ± 0.08 | 0.05 ± 0.04 |
| BUN (mg·dL−1) | 44.1 ± 3.2 | 43.9 ± 4.1 | 50.9 ± 8.9 | 48.6 ± 8.6 |
| Creatinine (mg·dL−1) | 0.6 ± 0.2 | 0.5 ± 0.06 | 0.4 ± 0.1* | 0.5 ± 0.1 |
| δ-GT (U·L−1) | 1.6 ± 0.5 | 1.7 ± 0.7 | 2.8 ± 1.6 | 1.4 ± 0.7 |
|
| ||||
| Female | ||||
| Sodium (mEq·L−1) | 132.7 ± 6.0 | 132.7 ± 5.8 | 132.4 ± 2.6 | 136.2 ± 3.2 |
| Potassium (mEq·L−1) | 6.8 ± 1.1 | 8.4 ± 1.9 | 8.6 ± 1.4 | 6.0 ± 0.3 |
| Glucose (mg·dL−1) | 116.6 ± 22.9 | 123.5 ± 14.9 | 119.5 ± 17.1 | 131.9 ± 16.4 |
| Triglyceride (mg·dL−1) | 99.9 ± 20.6 | 78.5 ± 22.7 | 58.9 ± 12.5* | 72.7 ± 21.3* |
| Cholesterol (mg·dL−1) | 98.4 ± 13.3 | 88.2 ± 11.9 | 92.0 ± 19.5 | 96.9 ± 22.2 |
| Uric acid (mg·dL−1) | 1.4 ± 0.4 | 1.8 ± 0.8 | 1.6 ± 0.4 | 1.1 ± 0.5 |
| ALP (U·L−1) | 59.5 ± 9.3 | 57.8 ± 13.6 | 67.4 ± 16.8 | 54.5 ± 19.1 |
| AST (U·L−1) | 173.4 ± 71.9 | 233.9 ± 90.9 | 193.5 ± 58.6 | 136.4 ± 65.9 |
| ALT (U·L−1) | 59.0 ± 12.9 | 73.7 ± 20.0 | 68.5 ± 14.9 | 51.9 ± 6.1 |
| Total protein (g/dL) | 7.4 ± 0.8 | 7.4 ± 0.2 | 7.9 ± 0.5 | 7.3 ± 0.5 |
| Total bilirubin (mg·dL−1) | 0.13 ± 0.05 | 0.15 ± 0.08 | 0.12 ± 0.09 | 0.13 ± 0.05 |
| (mg·dL−1) | 49.5 ± 5.9 | 59.3 ± 12.7 | 55.2 ± 6.6 | 45.3 ± 6.8 |
| Creatinine (mg·dL−1) | 0.6 ± 0.2 | 0.5 ± 0.1 | 0.5 ± 0.1 | 0.6 ± 0.1 |
| δ-GT (U·L−1) | 1.9 ± 0.9 | 3.3 ± 1.4 | 3.4 ± 1.4 | 2.5 ± 0.9 |
The data are expressed as mean ± SEM. *P < 0.05, compared with control group (ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis test).
3.2.3. Haematological Analyses
The effects of F2 of S. adstringens on hematological parameters showed specific changes but only in male rats (Table 5). Significant differences from the control groups were found, including decreased MCH (20.0 ± 0.4, 19.9 ± 0.5, and 20.0 ± 0.4 pg at 10, 100, and 200 mg·kg−1, resp.), decreased MCHC (35.1 ± 0.3% at 100 mg·kg−1), and increased platelet counts (929 ± 108 and 961 ± 105 × 103 mm−3 at 10 and 100 mg·kg−1, resp.). No significant differences were observed in female rats compared with the control group.
Table 5.
Hematological results in male and female rats orally treated with F2 of S. adstringens for 90 days.
| Parameters | Controls | F2 (mg·kg−1) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | 100 | 200 | ||
| Male | ||||
| WBC (×103 mm−3) | 10.6 ± 3.7 | 7.1 ± 0.6 | 8.7 ± 2.8 | 7.2 ± 1.6 |
| Segmented (%) | 20.9 ± 8.9 | 16.0 ± 6.5 | 15.9 ± 4.9 | 16.1 ± 4.6 |
| Eosinophil (%) | 2.3 ± 0.8 | 1.9 ± 0.8 | 1.5 ± 0.5 | 2.3 ± 0.9 |
| Lymphocyte (%) | 66.6 ± 11.8 | 75.2 ± 9.7 | 79.3 ± 5.2 | 78.6 ± 5.6 |
| Monocyte (%) | 3.4 ± 0.7 | 3.1 ± 0.8 | 3.1 ± 0.5 | 3.0 ± 0.9 |
| RBC (×106 mm−3) | 8.16 ± 0.3 | 8.16 ± 0.4 | 8.22 ± 0.5 | 8.50 ± 0.3 |
| Haemoglobin (g/dL) | 17.1 ± 0.6 | 16.0 ± 0.9 | 16.4 ± 1.1 | 17.0 ± 0.6 |
| Haematocrit (%) | 46.7 ± 1.8 | 46.3 ± 2.5 | 46.5 ± 3.2 | 47.7 ± 2.1 |
| MCV (fL) | 57.3 ± 1.2 | 56.7 ± 1.2 | 56.5 ± 1.2 | 55.9 ± 1.4 |
| MCH (pg) | 20.9 ± 0.5 | 20.0 ± 0.4* | 19.9 ± 0.5* | 20.0 ± 0.4* |
| MCHC (%) | 36.5 ± 0.7 | 35.6 ± 0.8 | 35.1 ± 0.3* | 35.8 ± 0.8 |
| Platelet (×103 mm−3) | 679 ± 171 | 929 ± 108* | 961 ± 105* | 895 ± 106 |
|
| ||||
| Female | ||||
| WBC (×103 mm−3) | 7.2 ± 1.1 | 10.5 ± 4.3 | 8.3 ± 2.6 | 7.9 ± 1.9 |
| Segmented (%) | 18.2 ± 8.0 | 20.2 ± 6.9 | 14.3 ± 4.3 | 19.0 ± 9.0 |
| Eosinophil (%) | 2.5 ± 0.9 | 2.1 ± 0.9 | 2.2 ± 0.9 | 2.0 ± 1.0 |
| Lymphocyte (%) | 76.2 ± 8.3 | 74.3 ± 8.0 | 76.5 ± 15.2 | 75.6 ± 10.3 |
| Monocyte (%) | 3.2 ± 0.8 | 3.1 ± 0.7 | 2.9 ± 0.8 | 3.2 ± 1.0 |
| RBC (×106 mm−3) | 7.35 ± 0.3 | 7.27 ± 0.6 | 7.26 ± 0.7 | 7.5 ± 0.4 |
| Haemoglobin (g/dL) | 15.6 ± 0.5 | 15.3 ± 1.2 | 15.3 ± 1.6 | 15.8 ± 0.9 |
| Haematocrit (%) | 43.7 ± 1.8 | 42.9 ± 3.9 | 45.6 ± 5.3 | 44.6 ± 2.4 |
| MCV (fL) | 59.5 ± 1.1 | 58.9 ± 1.8 | 59.9 ± 1.9 | 59.4 ± 1.1 |
| MCH (pg) | 21.2 ± 0.4 | 21.0 ± 0.5 | 21.2 ± 1.1 | 21.1 ± 0.3 |
| MCHC (%) | 35.7 ± 0.8 | 35.6 ± 1.3 | 35.3 ± 1.9 | 35.7 ± 0.5 |
| Platelet (×103 mm−3) | 878 ± 124 | 884 ± 187 | 856 ± 168 | 730 ± 202 |
The data are expressed as mean ± SEM. *P < 0.05, compared with control group (ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis test).
3.2.4. Organ Weights and Histopathological Analyses
No macroscopic alterations, differences in relative body weight, or histopathological parameters were observed compared with controls.
3.2.5. Open-Field Test
Locomotion (Figure 4), rearing, urination, the number of fecal pellets, and self-cleaning behavior were not significantly different between the treatment groups and controls.
Figure 4.
Open-field test results. The figure shows locomotion in rats that orally received F2 of Stryphnodendron adstringens at day 86 of treatment. The data are expressed as mean ± SEM. *P < 0.05, compared with control group (ANOVA).
4. Discussion
The indiscriminate use of S. adstringens without considering possible toxicity or efficacy can lead to serious health risks. The proanthocyanidin polymer-rich fraction (heptamer compound) of the stem bark of S. adstringens (F2) offers possible advantages, including antifungal activity against Candida spp., especially C. albicans [16]. Vulvovaginal candidiasis is one of the most frequent pathologies observed in daily gynecology practice. Alternative herbal treatments may be less costly and lead to greater adherence to treatment, thus improving the patients quality of life [36–38].
The results of the acute toxicity study indicated that the toxicity of F2 from the stem bark of S. adstringens is low (Tables 1 and 2). Some signs of toxicity were observed, which increased progressively with increasing dose but were quickly reversible. No significant changes in organ weight or macroscopic and histological parameters were observed compared with the control group.
The decrease in liver weight at doses of 4,000 and 5,000 mg·kg−1 and tissue liver damage at a dose of 5,000 mg·kg−1 indicate a direct action of the plant in the liver at high doses, which is consistent with Rebecca et al. [23, 24], who studied doses >800 mg·kg−1 in rats.
The high LD50 values of F2 (3,015 mg·kg−1) confirm its low acute toxicity that has been indicated by other parameters [39]. Moreover, Rebecca et al. [23] found an LD50 of 2,700 mg·kg−1 of the crude extract with acute treatment, demonstrating that the aqueous fraction has less toxicity. The high LD50 values indicate that the extract can be administered with a high degree of safety.
In the repeated-dose oral toxicity experiment, no significant changes in behavior or mortality were observed in rats. According to Raza et al. [40], changes in body weight can indicate adverse effects when the animal shows a loss greater than 10% of initial weight. In the present study, however, neither group lost weight during treatment. At doses of 100 and 200 mg·kg−1, significant differences in weight gain were observed.
According to Lewis et al. [41], “some factors can be useful in differentiating a significant change from control values, from a treatment-related effect. This difference is less likely to be an effect of treatment if: there is no obvious dose response; it is due to finding(s) in one or more animals that could be considered outlier(s) and it is within normal biological variation (within the range of reference values).”
In the present study, the biochemical results varied widely between doses and between sexes, with no linear profile. The altered values were within normal limits, and the results are considered normal for this animal species. Other values that changed did not show a dose response [42, 43].
In male rats, potassium, AST, and creatinine at 100 mg·kg−1, triglycerides at 200 mg·kg−1, and uric acid at 100 and 200 mg·kg−1 significantly changed. In female rats, only triglycerides at 100 and 200 mg·kg−1 significantly changed compared with the control group. To evaluate kidney function, creatinine, urea, sodium, potassium, and uric acid were assessed [44]. Urea and sodium were not different from controls in both female and male rats. In males, significant differences in creatinine and potassium levels in the groups treated with F2 did not show a dose response, and uric acid remained within the normal range (1.2–7.5 mg·dL−1) [42]. The same parameters also did not change in females. This suggests that F2 does not adversely affect kidney function, confirmed by the absence of histopathological changes in this organ.
To evaluate liver function, AST, ALT, ALP, total bilirubin, and γ-GT were assessed because these are considered markers of liver function, and liver changes have been reported after phytotherapeutic product use [45–48]. In the present study, a significant increase in AST levels was only observed in male rats at the intermediate dose, with no dose response. As noted earlier, the high doses used in the acute study altered liver tissue, which could justify the increase in AST through the release of enzymes from the cells of the damaged organ or changes in cellular membrane permeability [23]. However, this did not appear to be the case at present. Our histopathological examinations did not indicate any cellular lesions.
The levels of total protein, glucose, cholesterol, and triglycerides were measured to assess the general biochemical profile of the animals and determine the presence of metabolic changes. The values were not significantly different between the control and treatment groups in both female and male rats, with the exception of triglycerides, which appeared to be reduced in both females and males but remained within the normal range [43]. High doses of the crude extract of stem bark can cause liver mitochondrion toxicity [23, 24]. Mitochondrial lesions can alter lipid metabolism.
In the present study, hematological changes did not appear to be related to treatment with F2. No changes were observed in females, but changes in MCH (10, 100, and 200 mg·kg−1), MCHC (100 mg·kg−1), and platelet counts (10 and 100 mg·kg−1) were observed in males. However, the changes in MCHC and platelets did not show a dose-response relationship, and the changes in MCH, despite being evident at the three doses tested, remained within the normal range (19.0 ± 1.09) [43]. These results suggest that F2 did not exert effects on blood cells or bone marrow, which are both sensitive to toxicity in animals [49]. This result is supported by the absence of F2 genotoxicity in mice in another study [28].
The relative weights of the organs did not show significant changes in the macroscopic and histopathological examinations in the treatment groups compared with controls in either sex. In contrast to the study by Rebecca et al. [23], which found thymus involution at high doses, lower doses did not affect this organ.
Another interesting result was found in the open-field test, in which none of the parameters showed significant changes, indicating that F2 did not exert neurobehavioral alterations in the animals.
The low toxicity of F2 from the stem bark of S. adstringens, reflected by high LD50 values, suggests a wide safety margin at therapeutic doses. In the repeated-dose oral toxicity study, no serious signs or significant changes in hematological, biochemical, and histopathological parameters or other remarkable effects were observed in rats. These toxicity studies suggest that the fraction is safe at the doses administered. However, further studies are needed to evaluate other parameters, including carcinogenicity, teratogenicity, and neurotoxicity. Future clinical pharmacology studies should also be conducted to determine tolerance and substantiate its pharmacological use.
5. Conclusions
The low toxicity of F2 obtained from stem bark of S. adstringens in the acute and repeated-dose oral (chronic) toxicity studies suggests that F2 obtained from the stem bark of S. adstringens is safe at the concentrations tested.
Conflict of Interests
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Maristela Gabriel for technical assistance. This study was supported by CAPES, CNPQ, FINEP, and PRONEX/Fundação Araucária.
Glossary
- F1:
Crude extract obtained from the stem bark of Stryphnodendron adstringens
- F2:
Aqueous fraction obtained from the stem bark of Stryphnodendron adstringens
- LD50:
Dose that inactivates 50% of individuals.
References
- 1.Udem SC, Obidoa O, Asuzu IU. Acute and chronic toxicity studies of Erythrina senegalensis DC stem bark extract in mice. Comparative Clinical Pathology. 2010;19(3):275–282. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Singh GK, Kumar V. Acute and sub-chronic toxicity study of standardized extract of Fumaria indica in rodents. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 2011;134(3):992–995. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2011.01.045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Calixto JB. Efficacy, safety, quality control, marketing and regulatory guidelines for herbal medicines (phytotherapeutic agents) Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research. 2000;33(2):179–189. doi: 10.1590/s0100-879x2000000200004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.de Albuquerque UP, Monteiro JM, Ramos MA, de Amorim ELC. Medicinal and magic plants from a public market in northeastern Brazil. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 2007;110(1):76–91. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2006.09.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Sanches ACC, Lopes GC, Toledo CEM, Sacramento LVS, Sakuragui CM, Mello JCP. Estudo Morfológico Comparativo das Cascas e Folhas de Stryphnodendron adstringens, S. polyphyllum e S. obovatum- Leguminosae. Latin American Journal of Pharmacy. 2007;26(3):362–368. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Lopes GC, Sanches ACC, Nakamura CV, Dias Filho BP, Hernandes L, De Mello JCP. Influence of extracts of Stryphnodendron polyphyllum Mart. and Stryphnodendron obovatum Benth. on the cicatrisation of cutaneous wounds in rats. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 2005;99(2):265–272. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2005.02.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Agra MDF, Silva KN, Basílio IJLD, De Freitas PF, Barbosa-Filho JM. Survey of medicinal plants used in the region Northeast of Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Pharmacognosy. 2008;18(3):472–508. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Brandão MG, Zanetti NN, Oliveira P, Grael CF, Santos AC, Monte-Mór RLM. Brazilian medicinal plants described by 19th century European naturalists and in the Official Pharmacopoeia. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 2008;120(2):141–148. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2008.08.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Pereira ZV, Mussury RM, de Almeida AB, Sangalli A. Medicinal plants used by Ponta Porã community, Mato Grosso do Sul State. Acta Scientiarum—Biological Sciences. 2009;31(3):293–299. [Google Scholar]
- 10.Audi EA, Toledo DP, Peres PG, et al. Gastric antiulcerogenic effects of Stryphnodendron adstringens in rats. Phytotherapy Research. 1999;3:264–266. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1573(199905)13:3<264::AID-PTR443>3.0.CO;2-R. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Audi EA, Mendes De Toledo CE, Solera Dos Santos F, et al. Biological activity and quality control of extract and stem bark from Stryphnodendron adstringens . Acta Farmaceutica Bonaerense. 2004;23(3):328–333. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Herzog-Soares JD, Alves RK, Isac E, et al. Atividade tripanocida in vivo de Stryphnodendron adstringens (barbatimão verdadeiro) e Caryocar brasiliensis (pequi) Revista Brasileira de Farmacognosia. 2002;12:1–2. [Google Scholar]
- 13.Luize PS, Tiuman TS, Morello LG, et al. Effects of medicinal plant extracts on growth of Leishmania (L.) amazonensis and Trypanosoma cruzi . Brazilian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2005;41(1):85–94. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Holetz FB, Ueda-Nakamura T, Dias Filho BP, et al. Biological effects of extracts obtained from Stryphnodendron adstringens on Herpetomonas samuelpessoai . Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. 2005;100(4):397–401. doi: 10.1590/s0074-02762005000400010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Felipe AMM, Rincão VP, Benati FJ, et al. Antiviral effect of Guazuma ulmifolia and Stryphnodendron adstringens on poliovirus and bovine herpesvirus. Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin. 2006;29(6):1092–1095. doi: 10.1248/bpb.29.1092. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Ishida K, Palazzo de Mello JC, Garcia Cortez DA, Dias Filho BP, Ueda-Nakamura T, Nakamura CV. Influence of tannins from Stryphnodendron adstringens on growth and virulence factors of Candida albicans . Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 2006;58(5):942–949. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkl377. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Ishida K, Rozental S, de Mello JCP, Nakamura CV. Activity of tannins from Stryphnodendron adstringens on Cryptococcus neoformans: effects on growth, capsule size and pigmentation. Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials. 2009;8:p. 29. doi: 10.1186/1476-0711-8-29. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.De Souza TM, Severi JA, Silva VYA, Santos E, Pietro RCLR. Bioprospection of antioxidant and antimicrobial activities in the bark of Stryphnodendron adstringens (Mart.) Coville (Leguminosae-Mimosoidae) Revista de Ciencias Farmaceuticas Basica e Aplicada. 2007;28(2):221–226. [Google Scholar]
- 19.Palazzo De Mello J, Petereit F, Nahrstedt A. Flavan-3-ols and prodelphinidins from Stryphnodendron adstringens . Phytochemistry. 1996;41(3):807–813. [Google Scholar]
- 20.Palazzo De Mello J, Petereit F, Nahrstedt A. Prorobinetinidins from Stryphnodendron adstringens . Phytochemistry. 1996;42(3):857–862. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Palazzo De Mello JC, Petereit F, Nahrstedt A. A dimeric proanthocyanidin from Stryphnodendron adstringens . Phytochemistry. 1999;51(8):1105–1107. [Google Scholar]
- 22.Lopes GC, Vieira Machado FA, Mendes de Toledo CE, Sakuragui CM, Palazzo de Mello JC. Chemotaxonomic significance of 5-deoxyproanthocyanidins in Stryphnodendron species. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology. 2008;36(12):925–931. [Google Scholar]
- 23.Rebecca MA, Ishii-Iwamoto EL, Grespan R, et al. Toxicological studies on Stryphnodendron adstringens . Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 2002;83(1-2):101–104. doi: 10.1016/s0378-8741(02)00219-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Rebecca MA, Ishii-Iwamoto EL, Kelmer-Bracht AM, et al. Effect of Stryphnodendron adstringens (barbatimão) on energy metabolism in the rat liver. Toxicology Letters. 2003;143(1):55–63. doi: 10.1016/s0378-4274(03)00065-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Bürger ME, Ahlert N, Baldisserotto B, Langeloh A, Schirmer B, Foletto R. Analysis of the abortive and/or infertilizing activity of Stryphnodendron adstringens (Mart.) Coville. Brazilian Journal of Veterinary Research and Animal Science. 1999;36:296–299. [Google Scholar]
- 26.Cintra P, Malaspina O, Bueno OC. Toxicity of barbatimão to Apis mellifera and Scaptotrigona postica, under laboratory conditions. Journal of Apicultural Research. 2003;42(1-2):9–12. [Google Scholar]
- 27.De Sousa NC, De Carvalho S, Spanó MA, Graf U. Absence of genotoxicity of a phytotherapeutic extract from Stryphnodendron adstringens (Mart.) Coville in somatic and germ cells of Drosophila melanogaster . Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis. 2003;41(4):293–299. doi: 10.1002/em.10151. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Costa MA, Ishida K, Kaplum V, et al. Safety evaluation of proanthocyanidin polymer-rich fraction obtained from stem bark of Stryphnodendron adstringens (Barbatimão) for use as a pharmacological agent. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 2010;58(2):330–335. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2010.07.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Anvisa—Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária. Resolução RDC nº 48. Dispõe sobre o registro de medicamentos fitoterápicos. 2004.
- 30.Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Anvisa—Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária. Resolução-RE nº 90. Guia para a realização de estudos de Toxicidade Pré-Clínica de Fitoterápicos. 2004.
- 31.Antonelli-Ushirobira TM, Kaneshima EN, Gabriel M, Audi EA, Marques LC, Mello JCP. Acute and subchronic toxicological evaluation of the semipurified extract of seeds of guaraná (Paullinia cupana) in rodents. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 2010;48(7):1817–1820. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2010.04.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Li C-Y, Devappa RK, Liu J-X, Lv J-M, Makkar HPS, Becker K. Toxicity of Jatropha curcas phorbol esters in mice. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 2010;48(2):620–625. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2009.11.042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Miller LC, Tainter ML. Estimation of the ED50 and its error by means of logarithmic probit graph paper. Proceedings of the society for Experimental Biology and Medicine. 1994;57:261–264. [Google Scholar]
- 34.Plantas que Curam. 2013, http://www.plantasquecuram.com.br/ervas/ barbatimao.html.
- 35.Royce JR. On the construct validity of open-field measures. Psychological Bulletin. 1977;84(6):1098–1106. [Google Scholar]
- 36.Odds FC, Brown AJP, Gow NAR. Antifungal agents: mechanisms of action. Trends in Microbiology. 2003;11(6):272–279. doi: 10.1016/s0966-842x(03)00117-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Fidel PL., Jr. History and update on host defense against vaginal candidiasis. American Journal of Reproductive Immunology. 2007;57(1):2–12. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0897.2006.00450.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Ostrosky-Zeichner L. Combination antifungal therapy: a critical review of the evidence. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 2008;14(4):65–70. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2008.01983.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Loomis TA, Hayes AW. Loomis Essentials of Toxicology. New York, NY, USA: Academic Press; 1996. [Google Scholar]
- 40.Raza M, Al-Shabanah OA, El-Hadiyah TM, Al-Majed AA. Effect of prolonged vigabatrin treatment on hematological and biochemical parameters in plasma, liver and kidney of Swiss albino mice. Scientia Pharmaceutica. 2002;70(2):135–145. [Google Scholar]
- 41.Lewis RW, Billington R, Debryune E, Gamer A, Lang B, Carpanini F. Recognition of adverse and nonadverse effects in toxicity studies. Toxicologic Pathology. 2002;30(1):66–74. doi: 10.1080/01926230252824725. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Mitruka BM, Rawnsley HM. Normal Experimental Animals. New York, NY, USA: Masson Publishing; 1977. Clinical biochemical and hematological reference values. [Google Scholar]
- 43.Wolford ST, Schroer RA, Gohs FX, et al. Reference range data base for serum chemistry and hematology values in laboratory animals. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health. 1986;18(2):161–188. doi: 10.1080/15287398609530859. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Chandramohan G, Al-Numair KS, Pugalendi KV. Effect of 3-hydroxymethyl xylitol on hepatic and renal functional markers and protein levels in streptozotocindiabetic rats. African Journal of Biochemistry Research. 2009;3:198–204. [Google Scholar]
- 45.Corns CM. Herbal remedies and clinical biochemistry. Annals of Clinical Biochemistry. 2003;40(5):489–507. doi: 10.1258/000456303322326407. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.El Hilaly J, Israili ZH, Lyoussi B. Acute and chronic toxicological studies of Ajuga iva in experimental animals. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 2004;91(1):43–50. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2003.11.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Aniagu SO, Nwinyi FC, Olanubi B, et al. Is Berlina grandiflora (Leguminosae) toxic in rats? Phytomedicine. 2004;11(4):352–360. doi: 10.1078/0944711041495155. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Yuen M-F, Tanaka Y, Fong DY-T, et al. Independent risk factors and predictive score for the development of hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic hepatitis B. Journal of Hepatology. 2009;50(1):80–88. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2008.07.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Harper HA. Review of Physiological Chemistry. 14th edition. Los Altos, Calif, USA: Lange Medical Publications; 1973. [Google Scholar]