Ex Vivo Antiplatelet and Thrombolytic Activity of Bioactive Fractions from the New-Fangled Stem Buds of Ficus religiosa L. with Simultaneous GC-MS Examination.

Different parts of Ficus religiosa are the common components of various traditional formulations for the treatment of several blood disorders. The new-fangled stem buds' powder was extracted with 80% ethanol and successively fractionated by chloroform and methanol. Chloroform and methanol fractions of Ficus religiosa (CFFR and MFFR) were tested for antiplatelet, antithrombotic, thrombolytic, and antioxidant activity in ex vivo mode. The MFFR was particularly investigated for GC-MS and toxicity. The antiplatelet activity of the CFFR, MFFR, and standard drug aspirin at 50 µg/mL was 54.32%, 86.61%, and 87.57%, and a significant delay in clot formation was noted. CFFR at different concentrations did not show a significant effect on the delay of clot formation, antiplatelet, and free radical scavenging activity. The most possible marker compounds for antiplatelet and antioxidant activity identified by GC-MS in the MFFR are salicylate derivatives aromatic compounds such as benzeneacetaldehyde (7), phenylmalonic acid (13), and Salicylic acid (14), as well as Benzamides derivatives such as carbobenzyloxy-dl-norvaline (17), 3-acetoxy-2(1H)-pyridone (16), and 3-benzylhexahydropyrrolo [1,2-a] pyrazine-1,4-dione (35). A toxicity study of MFFR did not show any physical indications of toxicity and mortality up to 1500 mg/kg body weight and nontoxic up to 1000 mg/kg, which is promising for the treatment of atherothrombotic diseases.

An assessment of the impact of herb-drug combinations used by cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Herb/Dietary Supplements (HDS) are the most popular Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) modality used by cancer patients and the only type which involves the ingestion of substances which may interfere with the efficacy and safety of conventional medicines. This study aimed to assess the level of use of HDS in cancer patients undergoing treatment in the UK, and their perceptions of their effects, using 127 case histories of patients who were taking HDS. Previous studies have evaluated the risks of interactions between HDS and conventional drugs on the basis on numbers of patient using HDSs, so our study aimed to further this exploration by examining the actual drug combinations taken by individual patients and their potential safety. METHOD: Three hundred seventy-five cancer patients attending oncology departments and centres of palliative care at the Oxford University Hospitals Trust (OUH), Duchess of Kent House, Sobell House, and Nettlebed Hospice participated in a self-administered questionnaire survey about their HDS use with their prescribed medicines. The classification system of Stockley's Herbal Medicine's Interactions was adopted to assess the potential risk of herb-drug interactions for these patients. RESULTS: 127/375 (34 %; 95 % CI 29, 39) consumed HDS, amounting to 101 different products. Most combinations were assessed as 'no interaction', 22 combinations were categorised as 'doubt about outcomes of use', 6 combinations as 'Potentially hazardous outcome', one combination as an interaction with 'Significant hazard', and one combination as an interaction of "Life-threatening outcome". Most patients did not report any adverse events. CONCLUSION: Most of the patients sampled were not exposed to any significant risk of harm from interactions with conventional medicines, but it is not possible as yet to conclude that risks in general are over-estimated. The incidence of HDS use was also less than anticipated, and significantly less than reported in other areas, illustrating the problems when extrapolating results from one region (the UK), in one setting (NHS oncology) in where patterns of supplement use may be very different to those elsewhere.

Cancer patients at risk of herb/food supplement-drug interactions: a systematic review.

Herbal medicines and dietary supplements are commonly taken by patients with cancer, leading to concern over interactions with conventional medicines. A literature search was carried out to identify published studies exploring supplement use by patients with a cancer diagnosis. A total of 818 articles were retrieved using the key words, but only 41 are judged to be relevant based on title. Following the review of the abstracts, ten papers were considered to be potentially relevant, but of these, only two met the selection criteria, and three additional papers were identified from published reviews. Of 806 patients surveyed, 433 (53.7%) were reported to be taking combinations of supplements and drugs, and 167 incidents of risk were identified, affecting 60 patients (13.9%). The interactions identified were mainly theoretical and not supported by clinical data. No studies reported any adverse events associated with these combinations; most did not record the actual drug combinations taken, and the risk potential of some supplements appears to have been over-estimated. More effort should be made to investigate supplement use in this vulnerable patient group, based on sound evidence of plausible interaction, not only to avoid harm but also to provide reassurance where appropriate if the patient wishes to take a particular supplement.