Degradation of Angelica sinensis polysaccharide: Structures and protective activities against ethanol-induced acute liver injury

Zhang, Yu; Wang, Haoyu; Zheng, Yuheng; Wu, Zhijing; Liu, Junxi; Cheng, Fang; Wang, Kaiping

doi:10.1016/j.carbpol.2023.121745

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This has limited the qualitative and quantitative analysis of GUPS in in vivo . Current techniques for measuring polysaccharide include fluorescent labeling ( Zheng Z. et al, 2020 ; Zhang et al, 2024 ), radioisotope labeling ( Zhang et al, 2018b ), immunoassay ( Tokita et al, 2010 ; Nualnoi et al, 2016 ), biological assay ( Pozharitskaya et al, 2018 ; Pozharitskaya et al, 2019 ), and chemical colorimetry ( Ishizuka et al, 2004 ). Among these, fluorescent labeling stands out due to its high sensitivity, selectivity, convenience, safety, and lack of radiation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vivo pharmacokinetics of Glycyrrhiza uralensis polysaccharides

Wubuli,

Chai,

Liu

et al. 2024

Front. Pharmacol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glycyrrhiza uralensis polysaccharides (GUPS) are widely applied in biomedicine and functional food due to their multiple pharmacological activities and low toxicity. Despite their widespread use, the in vivo metabolic profile of GUPS remains poorly understood. To address this gap, we developed a quantitative analysis method that involves labeling GUPS with visible fluorescein (5-DTAF) and near-infrared (NIR) fluorescein (Cy7), resulting in stable conjugates with substitution degrees of 0.81% for 5-DTAF and 0.39% for Cy7. The pharmacokinetic studies showed a biphasic elimination pattern in the blood concentration-time curve following both intravenous and oral administration, consistent with a two-compartment model. Using fluorescence quantification and NIR imaging, we observed that GUPS was distributed to various tissues, exhibiting higher concentrations particularly in liver, kidney and lung. Excretion studies indicated that feces were the major excretion pathway of GUPS after oral administration (60.98%), whereas urine was the main pathway after intravenous administration (31.16%). Notably, GUPS could be absorbed rapidly by gut (Tmax 1 ± 0.61 h) and showed a biological half-time t1/2 26.4 ± 7.72 h after oral administration. Furthermore, the Caco-2 cells uptake studies illustrated that macropinocytosis and clathrin-mediated endocytosis were participated in the transport of GUPS in intestine epithelium. This comprehensive analysis of the in vivo pharmacokinetics of GUPS not only enhances our understanding of its metabolic pathways but also establishes a foundational basis for its clinical application, optimizing its therapeutic potential and safety profile.

show abstract