09 October 2018: Animal Studies
Attenuation of Morphine Withdrawal Syndrome by Prosopis Farcta Extract and Its Bioactive Component Luteolin in Comparison with Clonidine in Rats
Ardeshir Moayeri A 1, Maryam Azimi B 1, Elahe Karimi DE 2,3, Ali Aidy DF 2, Naser Abbasi A 2,4*
DOI: 10.12659/MSMBR.909930
Med Sci Monit Basic Res 2018; 24:151-158
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Today, the plant Prosopis farcta is frequently used for traditional medicinal purposes. The aim of this study was the identification of luteolin in P. farcta extract (PFE) and to evaluate its effect on morphine discontinuation syndrome in rats.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPCL), luteolin was evaluated in PFE. The frequency of behavioral symptoms of morphine withdrawal (jumping, rearing, and teeth chattering) induced by naloxone challenge were illustrated in morphine-dependent rats receiving PFE, luteolin, saline, or clonidine. LD50 of PFE and luteolin was 540 mg/kg and 150 mg/kg, respectively. Signs of behavioral morphine withdrawal in rats were significantly inhibited by chronic co-administration of PFE, luteolin, or clonidine with morphine.
RESULTS: This study showed that PFE was less effective than clonidine at a dose of 100 mg/kg, and at doses of 200 mg/kg and 300 mg/kg it was comparable to clonidine, and did not show a significant difference in the reduction of morphine withdrawal symptoms. Luteolin was comparable in 30 mg/kg, 60 mg/kg, and 90 mg/kg with clonidine to reduce the frequency of morphine withdrawal symptoms. PFE can be used as a source of luteolin.
CONCLUSIONS: The study findings suggest that PFE and luteolin might reduce the signs of narcotic withdrawal. Due to a similar effect to clonidine, its mechanism of action might be through the protein kinase A pathway and might have human therapeutic potential.
Keywords: Chromatography, Liquid, Clonidine, Luteolin, Product Recalls and Withdrawals, Prosopis, Safety-Based Drug Withdrawals
Background
Opioid dependence is a global health problem that creates many social, individual, and economic problems. There are 3 main pharmacological therapies for opium dependence, including opioid detoxification, agonist maintenance, and antagonist maintenance. Methadone, buprenorphine, α2-adrenoceptor agonists, and adjunct medications are used for opioid detoxification. In antagonist maintenance, naltrexone (an opioid antagonist) is also used. Pharmacological drugs with proven effects agonist maintenance include buprenorphine, buprenorphine/naloxone, and methadone [1,2]. The pharmacologic agents used in the treatment of opioid dependence have important limitations in efficacy and safety. Novel pharmacologic options with more efficacy and better safety profiles are needed for opioid dependence treatment [3,4]. Plants and natural products are a potential source of novel and safer compounds to use for drug withdrawal management [5,6]. It has previously been reported that medicinal plants such as
Material and Methods
PLANT MATERIAL AND EXTRACTION:
The seeds of P. farcta were collected from Ilam Province, Iran at the fruiting stage (November 2015). The voucher number of the plant specimen (herbarium code 74/1525) was deposited in the Birjand University, Iran. The specimens were powdered after drying and 20 grams were used for extraction. Initially, the powder was degreased by hexane and then extracted by a Soxhlet extraction method in a water-methanol solvent. After extraction, the solvents were removed by rotary (ILK HB 10) method and the rest of the extract, having a yield of 6.94%, was lyophilized and kept stored at −20°C. The lyophilized samples were dissolved in methanol and filtered through a 0.22 μm syringe filter [15].
ISOLATION AND IDENTIFICATION OF THE LUTEOLIN BY HIGH-PERFORMANCE LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY (HPLC):
High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method was performed according to the previously described procedure [16]. A simple and reproducible reversed-phase HPLC with a Knauer liquid chromatography (Smart line; Knauer, Berlin, Germany) equipped with an ultraviolet detector (Well chrome, K-2600; Knauer) and a reverse-phase C18 column (Nucleosil H.P.; 25×0.46 cm internal diameter, pore size mm; Knauer) using isocratic elution with UV absorbance detection was developed and validated for the determination of luteolin. In the interval from zero to 60 minutes, solvent of 0.1% formic acid in water (solution B) was maintained at a range of 5% to 70% and solvent methanol (solution A) was fixed. Column temperature, mobile phase flow rate, injection volume, and detection wavelength were set at 25°C, 1 mL/min, 1 μL, and 348 nm, respectively. In the same condition, luteolin standard solution (dissolved in methanol) was run. Two 150 mg of dried extracts were dissolved in 10 mL HPLC-grade methanol, sonicated for 15 minutes, filtered through a 0.22 μm syringe filter and further diluted to 5 mg/mL. The peaks obtained from the PFE were compared with a luteolin standard. A stock solution of luteolin standard was prepared at 0.1 mg/mL in HPLC-grade methanol, filtered through a 0.22 μm syringe filter and further diluted in the same solvent to obtain 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, 0.8, 1.6, 3.2, 6.4, 12.5, 25, and 50 μg/mL.
DRUGS:
Morphine sulfate was purchased from the Darou Pakhsh pharmaceutical company (Iran). Naloxone hydrochloride was obtained from the Sigma-Aldrich Company (USA). All drugs and extracts were dissolved in normal saline. The drugs and extracts were prepared immediately prior to use and injected subcutaneously. The doses of total PFE, luteolin fraction, and morphine were as follows: total extract at 100, 200, and 300 mg/kg; luteolin fraction at 30, 60, and 90 mg/kg; and morphine at 50 mg/kg.
ANIMALS:
Male albino rats weighing 190–250 g from our own breeding colony (Institute of Medicinal Plants, ACECR, Karaj, Iran) were used. The rats were maintained at a temperature of 22–25ºC on a 12-hour dark-light cycle. The animals had access to standard rodent feed and water. Ten animals were used for each dose of the extracts or drugs, and the experiment was repeated 3 times. All animals were used only once. The grouping of the method used to study morphine withdrawal syndrome is shown in Table 1.
LD50 (MEDIAN LETHAL DOSE) IN RATS:
To determine toxicity, different doses of the PFE and luteolin dissolved in normal saline were gavaged in the groups, each consisting of 20 rats. The administered doses were 50, 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 mg/kg for PFE and 10, 20, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, and 180 mg/kg for luteolin. Afterward, the numbers of dead animals within 72 hours after the gavage were counted and the LD50 was calculated. Mortality was noted, and graphs were plotted between log-concentration versus percent mortality and log-concentration versus probit mortality, and the LD50 was determined [17,18]. Therefore, PFE with doses of 100, 200, and 300 mg/kg and luteolin with doses of 30, 60, and 90 mg/kg were selected for continuing the experiments.
MORPHINE DEPENDENCY METHOD:
For this experiment, for 7 days, morphine was injected subcutaneously into the rats twice daily. A dose of 2.5 mg/kg of morphine was used on days 1 and 2 (twice daily) and these doses doubled every day until the 6th day, reaching 40 mg/kg. On the 7th day, rats received a last dose of 50 mg/kg [19]. To produce the same stress, rats were injected in group 9 with normal saline.
METHOD OF WITHDRAWAL SYNDROME:
In all groups, rats received 3 mg/kg naloxone by intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection 4 hours after the last dose of morphine treatment on day 7. Immediately after naloxone injection, to monitor the morphine withdrawal symptoms manifestations (jumping, rearing, teeth chattering), each animal was placed in a transparent cylindrical container for half an hour [20].
METHOD OF CO-ADMINISTRATION USE OF PFE AND MORPHINE ON MORPHINE DEPENDENCY AND WITHDRAWAL SYNDROME:
Rats in groups 3, 4, 5, and 9 received PFE at doses of 100 mg/kg, 200 mg/kg, and 300 mg/kg and normal saline respectively, by NG tube concurrently with morphine twice daily for 6 days; To examine the challenge, 4 hours prior to naloxone injection, animals in groups 3, 4, and 5 received the last dose on day 7, and group 9 received saline with morphine. In order to investigate the effect of PFE on the weakening of morphine dependence, behavioral symptoms of withdrawal in animals of groups 3, 4, 5, and 9 were compared.
METHOD OF CO-ADMINISTRATION USE OF LUTEOLIN AND MORPHINE ON MORPHINE DEPENDENCY AND WITHDRAWAL SYNDROME:
Rats in groups 6, 7, 8, and 9 received luteolin at 30 mg/kg, 60 mg/kg, and 90 mg/kg, and saline respectively, by NG tube concurrently with morphine twice daily for 6 days; To examine the challenge, 4 hours prior to naloxone injection, animals in groups 6, 7, and 8 received the last dose on day 7, and group 9 received saline with morphine. In order to investigate the effect of luteolin on the weakening of morphine dependence, behavioral symptoms of withdrawal in animals of groups 6, 7, 8, and 9 were compared.
METHOD OF CO-ADMINISTRATION USE OF CLONIDINE HYDROCHLORIDE AND MORPHINE ON MORPHINE DEPENDENCY AND WITHDRAWAL SYNDROME:
In group 2, rats received clonidine hydrochloride at (0.2 mg/ kg i.p.) twice daily for 6 days with morphine; and to examine the challenge, 4 hours prior to naloxone injection, animals in group 2 received the last dose on day 7.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:
The animal study results were presented as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Tukey post hoc test was used for data analysis.
Results
EXTRACTION AND IDENTIFICATION:
The luteolin HPLC chromatogram was obtained as a standard broad peak with a retention time at 4.898 min at a wavelength of 348 nm. In the same conditions, the standard chromatogram of the methanolic PFE was similar to that of standard luteolin in 4.983 min (Figure 1A, 1B). Upon application of the developed method, well-separated peaks were obtained for luteolin in PFE as shown, compared to its respective standards as in Figure 1. The quantitative analysis revealed that luteolin was found to be predominant in the methanol fraction (2.64 mg/g of luteolin) of PFE. The assay method was validated, and the calibration curve was linear (R2=0.9999, y=178399x–4122.01).
DETERMINATION OF MORTALITY:
Mortality and LD50 values of PFE and luteolin were 540 and 150 mg/kg within 72 hours after administration (i.p.). The mortality rate increased with an increase in the dose concentration of PFE and luteolin. There was no mortality reported in animals administered orally with of 100, 200, or 300 mg/kg body weight of PFE and 30, 60, or 90 mg/kg body weight of luteolin.
MORPHINE-DEPENDENT RATS:
Administration of 200 and 300 mg/kg of PFE (P<0.05 vs. control and P<0.001 vs. control, respectively) and all doses of luteolin (30, 60, and 90 mg/kg) decreased significantly the number of jumps in morphine-dependent rats (P<0.001 vs. control) precipitated by administration of naloxone (5 mg/kg, i.p.) 2 hours after the last dose of morphine. The effect of PFE was dose-dependent. As expected, clonidine also reduced the number of jumps in animals (Figure 2).
EFFECT OF THE PFE AND LUTEOLIN ON THE NALOXONE-INDUCED REARING IN MORPHINE-DEPENDENT RATS:
Different doses of PFE (200 and 300 mg/kg) and luteolin (30, 60, and 90 mg/kg) decreased the rearing in morphine-dependent rats precipitated by administration of naloxone (5 mg/kg, i.p.) 2 hours after the last dose of morphine (P<0.001 vs. control). The effect of PFE and luteolin was dose-dependent. As expected, clonidine also reduced the number of the incidence of rearing in the study animals (Figure 3).
EFFECT OF THE PFE AND LUTEOLIN ON THE NALOXONE-INDUCED TEETH CHATTERING IN MORPHINE-DEPENDENT RATS:
Different doses of PFE (200 and 300 mg/kg) and luteolin (30, 60, and 90 mg/kg) decreased the teeth chattering in morphine-dependent rats precipitated by administration of naloxone (5 mg/kg, i.p.) 2 hours after the last dose of morphine (P<0.001 vs. control). The effect of PFE and luteolin was dose-dependent. Also, clonidine reduced the number of the teeth chattering in animals (Figure 4).
Discussion
In the present study, it was found that co-administration of PFE with morphine reduced the severity of the signs of morphine withdrawal syndrome induced by naloxone. These findings showed that the PFE was able to reduce the symptoms of morphine withdrawal syndrome. Our results demonstrated that the co-administration of either PFE or clonidine hydrochloride with morphine prior to withdrawal syndrome reduced the expected symptoms of naloxone in morphine-dependent rats. Also, our results indicated that increasing the dose of PFE significantly decreased the frequency of the signs of withdrawal syndrome including jumping, teeth chattering, and rearing following a naloxone trial. It has been reported that some substances such as magnesium, agmatine sulfate, yohimbine, midazolam and betacarbolines, harman and harmine, and 7-nitroindazole reduce the symptoms of withdrawal in the rat [21]. Also, it has been demonstrated that clonidine and lofexidine are more effective than placebo for the management of withdrawal from heroin or methadone [22]. The effect of medicinal plants to improve symptoms of morphine dependence has been studied. It has been reported that some medicinal plants, such as
LD50 of the total PFE and luteolin was 540 mg/kg and 150 mg/kg, respectively. It has been demonstrated that substances having LD50 values in the range of 50–500 mg/kg and 500–5000 mg/kg were considered moderately and slightly toxic, respectively [34]. The 90% of the total PFE and luteolin administered orally were moderately and slightly toxic, respectively in the rats. Moreover, the LD50 of the total PFE was 73% higher than that of luteolin, showing less toxicity of the total PFE compared to luteolin.
Conclusions
This study showed that clonidine compared with PFE at a dose of 100 mg/kg was effective in reducing symptoms of morphine withdrawal, but at a dose of 200 mg/kg and 300 mg/kg, no significant difference was found. However, luteolin at a dose of 30, 60, and 90 mg/kg had no significant difference compared to clonidine in attenuating the morphine withdrawal syndrome. LD50 of the extract of
References
1. Klein JW, Pharmacotherapy for substance use disorders: Med Clin North Am, 2016; 100(4); 891-910, pmid: 27235620
2. Soyka M, Mutschler J, Treatment-refractory substance use disorder: Focus on alcohol, opioids, and cocaine: Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry, 2016; 70; 148-61, pmid: 26577297
3. Reed K, Day E, Keen J, Strang J, Pharmacological treatments for drug misuse and dependence: Expert Opin Pharmacother, 2016; 16(3); 325-33
4. Tzschentke TM, Where do we stand in the field of anti-abuse drug discovery?: Expert Opin Drug Discov, 2015; 9(11); 1255-58
5. Ward J, Rosenbaum C, Hernon C, Herbal medicines for the management of opioid addiction: Safe and effective alternatives to conventional pharmacotherapy?: CNS Drugs, 2011; 25(12); 999-1007, pmid: 22133323
6. Tabatabai SM, Dashti S, Doosti F, Hosseinzadeh H, Phytotherapy of opioid dependence and withdrawal syndrome: A review: Phytother Res, 2014; 28(6); 811-30, pmid: 24151030
7. Ebrahimie M, Bahmani M, Shirzad H, A review study on the effect of Iranian herbal medicines on opioid withdrawal syndrome: J Evid Based Complementary Altern Med, 2015; 20(4); 302-9, pmid: 25818661
8. Abdelmoteleb A, Valdez-Salas B, Ceceña-Duran C: Chem Spec Bioavailab, 2017; 29(1); 1-5
9. Sharifi-Rad J, Hoseini-Alfatemi SM, Sharifi-Rad M: Minerva Biotec, 2014; 26; 287-93
10. Mollashahi M, Tehranipour M, Khayyatzade J, The neuroprotective effects of Prosopis farcta pod aqueous and ethanol extracts on spinal cord α-motoneurons neuronal density after sciatic nerve injury in rats: Life Sci J, 2013; 10; 293-97
11. Harzallah-Skhiri F, BenJannet H: J Appl Sci Res, 2005; 1(2); 130-36
12. López-Lázaro M, Distribution and biological activities of the flavonoid luteolin: Mini Rev Med Chem, 2009; 9; 31-59, pmid: 19149659
13. Lin TY, Lu CW, Wang SJ, Luteolin protects the hippocampus against neuron impairments induced by kainic acid in rats: Neurotoxicology, 2016; 55; 48-57, pmid: 27185356
14. Wang H, Cheng H, Che Z, Ameliorating effect of luteolin on memory impairment in an Alzheimer’s disease model: Mol Med Rep, 2016; 13; 4215-20, pmid: 27035793
15. Lopez A, de Tangil MS, Vega-Orellana O: Molecules, 2013; 18(5); 4942-54, pmid: 23624648
16. Lu QZ, Yu AH, Xi YW, Development and evaluation of penciclovir-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles for topical delivery: Int J Pharm, 2009; 272; 191-98
17. Parmar NS, Prakash S: Screening methods in pharmacology, 2006, New Delhi, Alpha Science International Ltd.
18. El Kabbaoui M, Chda A, El-Akhal J: J Ethnopharmacol, 2017; 209; 147-56, pmid: 28750941
19. Romandini S, Cervo L, Samanin R, Evidence that drugs increasing 5-hydroxytryptamine transmission block jumping but not dog shakes in morphineabstinent rats: A comparison with clonidine: J Pharm Pharmacol, 1984; 36; 68-70, pmid: 6141273
20. Feily A, Abbasi N, The inhibitory effect of Hypericum perforatum extract on morphine withdrawal syndrome in rat and comparison with clonidine: Phytother Res, 2009; 23(11); 1549-52, pmid: 19370548
21. Aricioglu-Kartal F, Uzbay IT, Inhibitory effect of agmatine on naloxone-precipitated abstinence syndrome in morphine dependent rats: Life Sci, 1997; 61; 1775-81, pmid: 9365224
22. Gowing L, Farrell MF, Ali R, White JM, Alpha2-adrenergic agonists for the management of opioid withdrawal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2014; 3; 1-74
23. Cheaha D, Reakkamnuan C, Nukitram J: J Ethnopharmacol, 2017; 208; 129-37, pmid: 28687506
24. Gomaa A, Hashem T, Mohamed M, Ashry E: J Pharmacol Sci, 2003; 92; 50-55, pmid: 12832855
25. George M, Joseph L, Sharma A: Braz J Pharm Sci, 2012; 48(3); 577-81
26. Ahmad A, Khursheed KA, Ahmad V, Immunomodulating effect of juliflorine on the antibody response to Listeria hemolysin: Med J Islam World Acad Sci, 1992; 5; 189-93
27. Choudhary MI, Nawaz SA, Azim MK, Juliflorine: A potent natural peripheral anionic-site-binding inhibitor of acetylcholinesterase with calcium-channel blocking potential, a leading candidate for Alzheimer’s disease therapy: Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 2005; 332(4); 1171-79, pmid: 16021692
28. Ayanwuyi LO, Yaro AH, Abodunde OM: Pharm Biol, 2010; 48(3); 296-99, pmid: 20645816
29. Cheng HY, Hsieh MT, Tsai FS, Neuroprotective effect of luteolin on amyloid β protein (25–35)-induced toxicity in cultured rat cortical neurons: Phytother Res, 2010; 24(Suppl 1); S102-8, pmid: 19610032
30. Lin LF, Chiu SP, Wu MJ, Luteolin induces microRNA-132 expression and modulates neurite outgrowth in PC12 cells: PLoS One, 2012; 7; 293
31. Spencer JPE, Vafeiadou K, Williams RJ, Neuroinflammation: Modulation by flavonoids and mechanisms of action: Mol Aspects Med, 2012; 33; 83-97, pmid: 22107709
32. Abd Aziz CB, Ismail CAN, Che Hussin CM: J Tradit Complement Med, 2014; 4; 298-302, pmid: 25379476
33. Zhen JL, Chang YN, Qu ZZ, Luteolin rescues pentylenetetrazole-induced cognitive impairment in epileptic rats by reducing oxidative stress and activating PKA/CREB/BDNF signaling: Epilepsy Behav, 2016; 57; 177-84, pmid: 26967006
34. Ruiz P, Begluitti G, Tincher T, Prediction of acute mammalian toxicity using QSAR methods: A case study of sulfur mustard and its breakdown products: Molecules, 2012; 17(8); 8982-9001, pmid: 22842643
Most Viewed Current Articles
13 Apr 2020 : Original article 19,586
Outcome of 24 Weeks of Combined Schroth and Pilates Exercises on Cobb Angle, Angle of Trunk Rotation, Chest...DOI :10.12659/MSMBR.920449
Med Sci Monit Basic Res 2020; 26:e920449
20 Apr 2018 : Original article 17,466
Brain Training Games Enhance Cognitive Function in Healthy SubjectsDOI :10.12659/MSMBR.909022
Med Sci Monit Basic Res 2018; 24:63-69
23 Jul 2016 : Review article 10,353
Cardiac Hypertrophy: An Introduction to Molecular and Cellular BasisDOI :10.12659/MSMBR.900437
Med Sci Monit Basic Res 2016; 22:75-79
10 Aug 2020 : Clinical Research 9,788
Effects of Cognitive Task Training on Dynamic Balance and Gait of Patients with Stroke: A Preliminary Rando...DOI :10.12659/MSMBR.925264
Med Sci Monit Basic Res 2020; 26:e925264






