ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2024
Chemical characterization, assessment of acute oral toxicity, and antinociceptive potential of the methanolic extract of
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Aim of the study: This study aimed to chemically characterize the methanolic extract of Materials and methods: The leaves were collected during the rainy season, and the methanolic extract was obtained after gradient extraction using different solvents. MEMLL was analyzed using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR). Acute oral toxicity testing followed the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) guideline 423. Subsequently, acetic acid, hot plate, and formalin tests were used to evaluate the analgesic effects. Results: In the chemical characterization of MEMLL by HPLC, three flavonoids were identified: rutin, quercetin, and epicatechin. In addition, when NMR spectroscopy was performed, rutin and quercetin were again identified, as well as the chemical compounds luteolin and chrysoeriol. In the acute oral toxicity test, MEMLL showed no physiological or behavioral changes. In the nociceptive study, MEMLL showed an effect at doses of 50 and 100 mg/kg in the 0.6% acetic acid test, i.e., 51.46% and 75.08%, respectively. In the hot plate test, the MEMLL group at a dose of 50 mg/kg was effective at times of 30 and 60 min, i.e., 164.43% and 122.95%, respectively. Similarly, the MEMLL group at a dose of 100 mg/kg was also effective in increasing latency at times of 30 and 60 min, i.e., 162.62% and 136.68%, respectively. In the formalin test, MEMLL showed an antinociceptive effect on neurogenic pain at doses of 50 and 100 mg/kg when compared to the control group, 35.25% and 52.30%, respectively. In the inflammatory phase, inhibition was observed in the MEMLL at doses of 50 and 100 mg/kg, i.e., 66.39% and 72.15%, respectively. Conclusion: MEMLL has analgesic properties and is non-toxic, validating the Brazilian ethnopharmacological use of this plant for pain treatment. The leaves of the species
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.