4.7 Article

Jiawei-Yupingfeng-Tang, a Chinese herbal formula, inhibits respiratory viral infections in vitro and in vivo

期刊

JOURNAL OF ETHNOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 150, 期 2, 页码 521-528

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2013.08.056

关键词

Jiawei-Yupingfeng-Tang; Antiviral activity; Attachment; Penetration; ICAM

资金

  1. National Mega Project on Major Drug Development [2009ZX09301-014-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ethnopharmacological relevance: Jiawei-Yupingfeng-Tang (JYT) is a Chinese herbal formula that is widely used to treat respiratory tract illness. However, the effect of JYT on respiratory viruses remains unknown. The influenza virus (WV) and the human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) cause millions of cases of severe illness per year, and many of these illnesses develop into lethal pneumonia. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether JYT can be used to treat these infections. Materials and methods: The effect of JYT against IW and HRSV was tested using a plaque reduction assay in the lower respiratory tract cell line A549. The expression of ICAM-1 was determined by real-time RT-PCR and western blotting. A mouse model infected with lethal influenza developing into interstitial pneumonia was used to evaluate the effect of JYT in vivo. Results: JYT extract inhibited both IW and HRSV in a dose-dependent manner when given before, during and after a viral infection. JYT was effective in blocking the entry of the virus. Furthermore, pre-treatment with JYT reduced the susceptibility of cells to the invasion of HRSV by inhibiting the expression of ICAM-1. Importantly, JYT extract increased the survival rate of lethal influenza-infected mice, prolonged the survival time and alleviated the virus-induced lung lesions, which is comparable with the effects of ribavirin treatment. Conclusions: These data support JYT as an alternative modality to be used in the treatment of respiratory viral infection induced by HRSV and WV. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据