Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29187820›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2017

A Comprehensive Strategy to Evaluate Compatible Stability of Chinese Medicine Injection and Infusion Solutions Based on Chemical Analysis and Bioactivity Assay.

Jian-Ping Li, Yang Liu, Jian-Ming Guo, Er-Xin Shang, Zhen-Hua Zhu, Kevin Y Zhu, Yu-Ping Tang, Bu-Chang Zhao, Zhi-Shu Tang, Jin-Ao Duan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Jian-Ping LiJiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center of Chinese Medicinal Resources Industrialization, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Yang LiuJiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center of Chinese Medicinal Resources Industrialization, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Jian-Ming GuoJiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center of Chinese Medicinal Resources Industrialization, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Er-Xin ShangJiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center of Chinese Medicinal Resources Industrialization, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Zhen-Hua ZhuJiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center of Chinese Medicinal Resources Industrialization, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Kevin Y ZhuJiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center of Chinese Medicinal Resources Industrialization, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Yu-Ping TangJiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center of Chinese Medicinal Resources Industrialization, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Bu-Chang ZhaoBuchang Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Xi'an, China.
Zhi-Shu TangShaanxi University of Chinese Medicine, Xianyang, China.
Jin-Ao DuanJiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center of Chinese Medicinal Resources Industrialization, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stability of traditional Chinese medicine injection (TCMI) is an important issue related with its clinical application. TCMI is composed of multi-components, therefore, when evaluating TCMI stability, several marker compounds cannot represent global components or biological activities of TCMI. Till now, when evaluating TCMI stability, method involving the global components or biological activities has not been reported. In this paper, we established a comprehensive strategy composed of three different methods to evaluate the chemical and biological stability of a typical TCMI, Danhong injection (DHI). UHPLC-TQ/MS was used to analyze the stability of marker compounds (SaA, SaB, RA, DSS, PA, CA, and SG) in DHI, UHPLC-QTOF/MS was used to analyze the stability of global components (MW 80-1000 Da) in DHI, and cell based antioxidant capability assay was used to evaluate the bioactivity of DHI. We applied this strategy to assess the compatible stability of DHI and six infusion solutions (GS, NS, GNS, FI, XI, and DGI), which were commonly used in combination with DHI in clinic. GS was the best infusion solution for DHI, and DGI was the worst one based on marker compounds analysis. Based on global components analysis, XI and DGI were the worst infusion solutions for DHI. And based on bioactivity assay, GS was the best infusion solution for DHI, and XI was the worst one. In conclusion, as evaluated by the established comprehensive strategy, GS was the best infusion solution, however, XI and DGI were the worst infusion solutions for DHI. In the compatibility of DHI and XI or DGI, salvianolic acids in DHI would be degraded, resulting in the reduction of original composition and generation of new components, and leading to the changes of biological activities. This is the essence of instability compatibility of DHI and some infusion solutions. Our study provided references for choosing the reasonable infusion solutions for DHI, which could contribute the improvement of safety and efficacy of DHI. Moreover, the established strategy may be applied for the compatible stability evaluation of other TCMIs.

Indexed as

Chinese medicine injectioncompatibilityDanhong injectioninfusion solutionstability

Identifiers

PMID29187820
PMCPMC5694823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.