4.3 Article

Ginseng (Panax quinquefolius) and Licorice (Glycyrrhiza uralensis) Root Extract Combinations Increase Hepatocarcinoma Cell (Hep-G2) Viability

Journal

Publisher

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1093/ecam/nep074

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Singapore
  2. National University of Singapore (NUS) [R-143-00-340-112]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The combined cytoactive effects of American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius) and licorice (Glycyrrhiza uralensis) root extracts were investigated in a hepatocarcinoma cell line (Hep-G2). An isobolographic analysis was utilized to express the possibility of synergistic, additive or antagonistic interaction between the two extracts. Both ginseng and licorice roots are widely utilized in traditional Chinese medicine preparations to treat a variety of ailments. However, the effect of the herbs in combination is currently unknown in cultured Hep-G2 cells. Ginseng (GE) and licorice (LE) extracts were both able to reduce cell viability. The LC50 values, after 72 h, were found to be 0.64 +/- 0.02 mg/mL (GE) and 0.53 +/- 0.02 mg/mL (LE). An isobologram was plotted, which included five theoretical LC50s calculated, based on the fixed fraction method of combination ginseng to licorice extracts to establish a line of additivity. All combinations of GE to LE (1/5, 1/3, 1/2, 2/3, 4/5) produced an effect on Hep-G2 cell viability but they were all found to be antagonistic. The LC50 of fractions 1/3, 1/2, 2/3 were 23%, 21% and 18% above the theoretical LC50. Lactate dehydrogenase release indicated that as the proportion of GE to LE increased beyond 50%, the influence on membrane permeability increased. Cell-cycle analysis showed a slight but significant arrest at the G1 phase of cell cycle for LE. Both GE and LE reduced Hep-G2 viability independently; however, the combinations of both extracts were found to have an antagonistic effect on cell viability and increased cultured Hep-G2 survival.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available