According to traditional Chinese medicine theories, Euphorbiae Pekinensis Radix and Glycyrrhizae Radix should not be used together in one prescription, because their interaction leads to an unexpected consequence. However, the mechanism remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to find out whether CYP2C9 was involved in this herb-herb interaction by using tolbutamide as a probe substrate in vivo and in vitro. Both Euphorbiae Pekinensis Radix and Glycyrrhizae Radix showed induction activity toward CYP2C9, while the combination of them showed a more potent induction activity toward CYP2C9 in vivo. In vitro study revealed only the combination of the herbs could induce the activity of CYP2C9. Thus, both in vivo and in vitro study indicated combination of Glycyrrhizae Radix and Euphorbiae Pekinensis Radix could induce the activity of CYP2C9 to a high level, which may result in decreased plasma levels of major active ingredients of these two herbs, as well as other herbs in the prescriptions. Further research also appears to be necessary to identify the main enzymes involved in the metabolism of the active ingredients in Glycyrrhizae Radix and Euphorbiae Pekinensis Radix.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
4
44%
Medicine and Dentistry
2
22%
Unknown
3
33%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 August 2014.
All research outputs
#22,759,452
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#12,403
of 19,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,187
of 247,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#48
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,717 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 247,499 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
