ArticleToxicology reports2023
Evaluation of acute, subacute, and subchronic toxicity of a hepatoprotective herbal formulation.
Article in Toxicology reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Targeting the Gut Microbiota with Herbal Compounds from Traditional Chinese Medicine: A Mechanistic Synthesis of a Novel Therapeutic Approach for Ulcerative Colitis.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Review
- Subacute Oral Toxicity Evaluation of Red Pine Oil in Sprague-Dawley Rats: Safety Profiling for Potential Therapeutic Use.Journal of toxicology · 2026Article
- Enzyme-Mediated Precipitation of Heavy Metals Using Urease Extracted fromIranian journal of biotechnology · 2026Article
- Impact of Green-Synthesized Silver Nanoparticle in Wistar Rats: Behavioral, Biochemical, And Histopathological Insights from Acute and Sub-Acute Oral Exposure.Archives of Razi Institute · 2025Article
- Revolutionizing cancer therapy: Monoclonal antibodies in radiosensitization.BioImpacts : BI · 2025Review
- Antiplasmodial Screening of Phikud Navakot Formulation and In Vivo Evaluation, Toxicity, and Phytochemical Profiling of the PotentScientifica · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The possible toxicity of natural products must be tested before being used in the market. The present work aimed to evaluate acute, subacute, and subchronic toxicity of an herbal formulation containing Material and methods: Acute toxicity (2000 mg/kg, single dose) and sub-acute toxicity (600 and 1200 mg/kg/day, 4 weeks) tests were performed on female and male rats according to OECD 423 and OECD 407 guidelines, respectively. In the subchronic study (12 weeks), the animals were divided into three groups (6 females and 6 males per group): control, low-dose group (food supplemented with 300 mg/kg of the herbal product), and high-dose group (600 mg/kg). Results: The herbal product at a single dose of 2000 mg/kg did not induce mortality for 14 days. In the sub-acute study, administration of the product for 28 days at 1200 mg/kg/day had no effect on survival, appetite (water and food consumption), body weight, serum biochemical parameters (BUN, creatinine, AST, ALT, ALP, bilirubin, albumin), histology of vital organs (liver, kidney, heart, brain), and hematological markers related to erythrocyte, platelet, and leukocyte. Similarly, in the subchronic study, the product did not induce mortality, change in histology of the vital organs, or alteration in hematological or biochemical parameters (except for an increase in ALP in female rats received 600 mg/kg). Conclusion: The formulated product shows no signs of toxicity in rats up to 2000 mg/kg, 1200 mg/kg, and 600 mg/kg in acute, subacute, and subchronic phases, respectively. It is suggested to monitor ALP levels in females in case of long-term use of the product.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.