4.6 Article

Comparative Pharmacokinetics Study of Sinomenine in Rats after Oral Administration of Sinomenine Monomer and Sinomenium Acutum Extract

Journal

MOLECULES
Volume 19, Issue 8, Pages 12065-12077

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules190812065

Keywords

pharmacokinetics; traditional Chinese medicine; sinomenine; Sinomenium acutum; alkaloids; HPLC

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81173123]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province [2013021080]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Various products containing sinomenine monomer and extracts of Sinomenium acutum have been widely applied in clinical treatments. The goal of the present study was to compare the pharmacokinetics of sinomenine in rats after oral administration of sinomenine monomer and Sinomenium acutum extract, and to attempt to explore potential component-component interactions between the constituents of this traditional Chinese herbal medicine. A reliable and specific reversed phase high performance liquid chromatography method was developed to analyze sinomenine in rat plasma. Pharmacokinetic parameters for sinomenine were processed by non-compartmental analysis. The results showed that the maximum concentration, the area under the concentration-time curve, clearance and the apparent volume of distribution of sinomenine in the Sinomenium acutum extract statistically differed from those of sinomenine monomer (p < 0.05); however, the mean residence time, time of peak concentration, and half-life did not show significant differences between the two groups. These findings suggested that some additional components in the Sinomenium acutum extract may decrease the absorption of sinomenine. The complex interactions between sinomenine and other components of the herbal extract could result in the altered pharmacokinetic behavior of sinomenine, which may subsequently cause different therapeutic and detoxification effects.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available