Why the study?
Does QiShenYiQi formula and its component herbs improve network recovery and reduce infarct size in a rat model of acute myocardial ischemia?
Does QiShenYiQi formula and its component herbs improve network recovery and reduce infarct size in a rat model of acute myocardial ischemia?
The QiShenYiQi formula demonstrates synergistic efficacy in treating acute myocardial ischemia at the molecular network level, supporting the traditional 'Jun-Chen-Zuo-Shi' formulation rule.
QSYQ synergy in rat AMI model is hypothesis-generating; leaves open clinical translation of network pharmacology for herbal formulas.
BACKGROUND: The role of "Jun-Chen-Zuo-Shi" (also known as "sovereign-minister-assistant-courier") component herbs of Chinese medicine is not fully understood. This study aims to test the "Jun-Chen-Zuo-Shi" rule with the QiShenYiQi formula (QSYQ) on treating acute myocardial ischemia (AMI) by a network pharmacology approach. METHODS: An Acute Myocardial Ischemia (AMI) specific Organism Disturbed Network (AMI-ODN), was constructed by integrating data of disease-associated genes, protein-protein interaction and microarray experiments. A network-based index, Network Recovery Index for Organism Disturbed Network (NRI-ODN), was developed to measure the therapeutic efficacy of QSYQ and its ingredients, i.e., the ability to recover disturbed AMI network model back to normal state. RESULTS: The whole formula of QSYQ got a NRI-ODN score of 864.48, which outperformed all individual herbs. Additionally, the primary component herbs, Radix Astragalus membranaceus and Radix Salvia miltiorrrhiza showed NRI-DON score of 680.27 and 734.31 respectively, which meant a better performance to recover disturbed AMI network than the supplementary component herbs, Panax notoginseng and Dalbergia sissoo did (545.76 and 584.88, respectively). CONCLUSION: AMI-ODN model and NRI-ODN identified the possible roles of "Jun-Chen-Zuo-Shi" component herbs of QSYQ in treating AMI at molecular network and pathway level.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wu et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: