| Title |
Aqueous extract of Rabdosia rubescens leaves: forming nanoparticles, targeting P-selectin, and inhibiting thrombosis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s91316 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yuji Wang, Jingcheng Tang, Haimei Zhu, Xueyun Jiang, Jiawang Liu, Wenyun Xu, Haiping Ma, Qiqi Feng, Jianhui Wu, Ming Zhao, Shiqi Peng |
| Abstract |
The hot water extract of Rabdosia rubescens was traditionally used as an antithrombotic medicine. To explore its antithrombotic utility and mechanism, we carried out a series of in vitro and in vivo assays in this study. In vitro platelet aggregation assay showed that the half maximal inhibitory concentration values of aqueous extract of R. rubescens leaves (AERL) inhibiting platelet aggregation induced by thrombin, arachidonic acid, adenosine diphosphate, and platelet-activating factor ranged from 0.12 mg/mL to 1.43 mg/mL. The minimal effective oral dose of AERL inhibiting the rats from forming thrombus was 25 mg/kg. Both in vitro and in vivo actions were correlated with AERL concentration-dependently inhibiting sP-selectin release. In water, AERL formed nanoparticles, and their size depended on the concentration. Docking the five nucleotides, 21 phenolic acids, and four diterpenoids identified by high-performance liquid chromatography-photodiode array detector/(-)electrospray ionization-tandem mass spectrometry analysis into the active site of P-selectin, rosmarinic acid was predicted to be the antithrombotic ingredient of AERL. In flow cytometry analysis, 1 μM of rosmarinic acid effectively inhibited sP-selectin release in arachidonic acid-activated platelets. In a rat model, 5 mg/kg of oral rosmarinic acid effectively inhibited thrombosis. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 15% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 15% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 25% |
| Unknown | 4 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 November 2015.
All research outputs
#17,302,400
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,472
of 4,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,494
of 294,905 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#93
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,122 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,905 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.