4.7 Article

Assessment of sub-chronic oral toxicity of Nityanand Rasa: An ayurvedic herbo-metallic formulation

期刊

JOURNAL OF ETHNOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 312, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2023.116494

关键词

Nityanand Rasa; Sub -chronic toxicity; Genotoxicity; Biochemical parameters; Gene expression; Biodistribution

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to evaluate the sub-chronic oral toxicity of Nityananda Rasa (NR). The results showed that NR induced moderate toxic effects at high dose but can be considered safe at therapeutic doses.
Ethnopharmacological relevance: Nityananda Rasa (NR) is an ayurvedic herbo-metallic formulation used to treat gout, obesity, hypothyroidism, elephantiasis, and other diseases. However, its safety is a concern owing to the use of heavy metals like mercury and arsenic. Aim of the study: To study the sub-chronic oral toxicity of NR on albino wistar rats for safety evaluation. Materials and methods: The male and female albino wistar rats were administered a daily dose of 30 (low), 300 (medium) and 600 (high) mg/kg BW/day of NR for 90-day period. The body weight and feed consumption were monitored once a week. After 90 days, blood and vital organs were harvested for genotoxicity, hematology, biochemistry, histopathology, gene expression and the biodistribution analysis. Results: There was no mortality or severe behavioural changes observed in rats. Significant changes in biochemical enzyme levels were seen at medium and high doses of NR i. e. 300 and 600 mg/kg BW/day respectively. No hematological changes were observed. Mild histopathological changes seen at high dose of NR which were found in concurrence with the biochemical alterations in liver and brain. There was mild genotoxicity and no detectable level of mercury but significant arsenic level in blood at high dose. Gene expression was mildly affected. Conclusions: NR induced moderate toxic effects at high dose but can be considered safe at therapeutic doses.

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