4.2 Article

Huangqin-Tang Ameliorates TNBS-Induced Colitis by Regulating Effector and Regulatory CD4+ T Cells

期刊

BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
卷 2015, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2015/102021

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [81173240]
  2. Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province [2013B032500019]
  3. PhD Start-up Fund of Guangdong Medical College [B2013005, B2013006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Huangqin-Tang decoction (HQT) is a classic traditional Chinese herbal formulation that is widely used to ameliorate the symptoms of gastrointestinal disorders, including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). This study was designed to investigate the therapeutic potential and immunological regulatory activity of HQT in experimental colitis in rats. Using an animal model of colitis by intrarectally administering 2,4,6-trinitrobenzenesulfonic acid (TNBS), we found that administration of HQT significantly inhibited the severity of TNBS-induced colitis in a dose-dependent manner. In addition, treatment with HQT produced better results than that with mesalazine, as shown by improved weight loss bleeding and diarrhoea scores, colon length, and intestinal inflammation. As for potential immunological regulation of HQT action, the percentages of Th1 and Th17 cells were reduced, but those Th2 and Treg cells were enhanced in LPMCs after HQT treatment. Additionally, HQT lowered the levels of Th1/Th17-associated cytokines but increased production of Th2/Treg-associated cytokines in the colon and MLNs. Furthermore, we observed a remarkable suppression of the Th1/Th17-associated transcription factors T-bet and ROR-gamma t. However, expression levels of the Th2/Treg-associated transcription factors GATA-3 and Foxp3 were enhanced during treatment with HQT. Our results suggest that HQT has the therapeutic potential to ameliorate TNBS-induced colitis symptoms. This protective effect is possibly mediated by its effects on CD4(+) T cells subsets.

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

4.2
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