Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Oct 26;11(21):2854.
doi: 10.3390/plants11212854.

Mechanisms of Actions Involved in The Antinociceptive Effect of Estragole and its β-Cyclodextrin Inclusion Complex in Animal Models

Affiliations

Mechanisms of Actions Involved in The Antinociceptive Effect of Estragole and its β-Cyclodextrin Inclusion Complex in Animal Models

Roger Henrique Sousa da Costa et al. Plants (Basel). .

Abstract

(1) Background: estragole is a monoterpene found in the essential oils of several aromatic plants, which can be used for several pharmacological activities. The aim of this study was to evaluate the antinociceptive effect of estragole (Es) and its β-cyclodextrins inclusion complex (Es/β-CD). (2) Methods: the effects of Es and Es/β-CD on the central nervous system (CNS) were evaluated through open field and rota-rod assays, and the antinociceptive effect in formalin models, abdominal writhing induced by acetic acid, hot plate, tail flick test and plantar mechanical hyperalgesia. (3) Results: Es and Es/β-CD showed no alterations on the CNS evaluated parameters and the results suggested there was an antinociceptive action in the formalin, abdominal writhing, hot plate, tail flick tests and plantar mechanical hyperalgesia, proposing the involvement of the nitric oxide, glutamatergic signaling pathways, cyclic guanosine monophosphate and vanilloid pathways. (4) Conclusion: the results suggest that Es and Es/β-CD have a promising antinociceptive potential as a possible alternative for the pharmacological treatment of pain, also showing that the encapsulation of Es in β-cyclodextrins probably improves its pharmacological properties, since the complexation process involves much lower amounts of the compound, contributing to better bioavailability and a lower probability of adverse effect development.

Keywords: cyclodextrins; estragole; monoterpene; nociception.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Spectrum in the infrared region: (A) estragole; (B) β-cyclodextrin; (C) Es/β-CD.
Figure 2
Figure 2
(A) Antinociceptive effect of estragole (Es) (60, 30 and 15 mg/kg) in the abdominal writhing test induced by acetic acid. (B) Antinociceptive effect of complex of estragole in β-CD (60, 30 and 15 mg/kg) in the abdominal writhing test induced by acetic acid, for (n = 6/group). The values show the arithmetic mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean). One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test (**** p < 0.0001, when compared to the negative control group).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Evaluation of antinociceptive effect of estragole and Es/β-CD (60, 30 and 15 mg/kg) in the Formalin test. Effect in the neurogenic phase of Es (A) and Es/β-CD (B) and inflammatory phase to of Es (C) and Es/β-CD (D). Values show the mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean) for (6 = n/groups). One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test (**** p < 0.0001, when compared to the negative control group).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Antinociceptive effect of estragole (A) and Es/β-CD (B) (60, 30 and 15 mg/kg) in the hot plate test. Values show the mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean) for (6 = n/groups). Two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; **** p < 0.0001, when compared to the negative control group).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Antinociceptive effect of estragole (A) and Es/β-CD (B) (60, 30 and 15 mg/kg) in the tail flick test. Values show the mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean) for (6 = n/groups). Two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test. (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; **** p < 0.0001, when compared to the negative control group).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Antinociceptive effect of estragole (A) and Es/β-CD (B) (60, 30 and 15 mg/kg)in the von Frey test,. Values show the mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean) for (6 = n/groups). Two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; **** p < 0.0001, when compared to the negative control group).
Figure 7
Figure 7
Antinociceptive response of estragole and Es/β-CD (15 mg/kg) in the opioid signaling pathway. Values show the mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean) for (6 = n/group). One-way (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s test (**** p < 0.0001, when compared to the negative control group). (#### p < 0.0001, when comparing the antagonist + agonist vs. agonist.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Antinociceptive response of estragole and Es/β-CD (15 mg/kg) in the cholinergic system signaling pathway. Values show the mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean) for (6 = n/group). One-way (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s test (significance of p < 0.0001—*** when compared to the negative control group). ####p < 0.0001, when comparing the antagonist + agonist vs. agonist).
Figure 9
Figure 9
Antinociceptive response of estragole and Es/β-CD (15 mg/kg) in the nitric oxide signaling pathway. Values show the mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean) for (6 = n/group). One-way (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s test, when compared to the negative control group). (#### p < 0.0001, when comparing antagonist + agonist vs. agonist; estragole alone vs. atropine + estragole; Es/β-CD alone vs. atropine + Es/β-CD; ns – no significant.
Figure 10
Figure 10
Antinociceptive response of estragole and Es/β-CD (15 mg/kg) in the α-2 adrenergic system signaling pathway. Values show the mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean) for (6 = n/group). One-way (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s test (**** p < 0.0001, when compared to the negative control group). (#### p < 0.0001, when comparing antagonist + agonist vs. agonist).
Figure 11
Figure 11
Antinociceptive response of estragole and Es/β-CD (15 mg/kg) in the dopaminergic signaling pathway. Values show the mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean) for (6 = n/group). One-way (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s test (**** p < 0.0001, when compared to the negative control group).
Figure 12
Figure 12
Antinociceptive response of estragole and Es/β-CD (15 mg/kg) in the adenosinergic signaling pathway. Values show the mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean) for (6 = n/group). One-way (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s test (*** p < 0.001; ** p < 0.01, when compared to the negative control group).
Figure 13
Figure 13
Antinociceptive response of estragole and Es/β-CD (15 mg/kg) in the glutamatergic signaling pathway. Values show as the mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean) for (6 = n/group). One-way (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s test (ns – no significant; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001, when compared to the negative control group).
Figure 14
Figure 14
Antinociceptive response of estragole and Es/β-CD (15 mg/kg) in the cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) signaling pathway. Values show the mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean) for (6 = n/group). One-way (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s test (* p < 0.05; **** p < 0.0001, when compared to the negative control group).
Figure 15
Figure 15
Antinociceptive response of estragole and Es/β-CD (15 mg/kg) in the vanilloid signaling pathway. Values show the mean ± S.E.M (Standard Error of the Mean) for (6 = n/group). One-way (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s test (**** p < 0.0001; when compared to the negative control group).

Similar articles

References

    1. Lent R. One Hundred Billion Neurons: Fundamental Concepts of Neuroscience. São Paulo Atheneu. 2001:651–680.
    1. Pinho-Ribeiro F.A., Zarpelon A.C., Fattori V., Manchope M.F., Mizokami S.S., Casagrande R., Verri W.A. Naringenin Reduces Inflammatory Pain in Mice. Neuropharmacology. 2016;105:508–519. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2016.02.019. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Patel N.B. Capítulo 3 Fisiologia Da Dor. Guia Para O Trat. Da Dor Em Contextos De Poucos Recur. 2010:9.
    1. Alves Neto O., Costa CM D.C., Siqueira JT T.D., Teixeira M.J. Dor: Princípios e Prática. Artmed Editora; Porto Alegre, Brazil: 2009. Dor: Princípios e Prática; p. 1438.
    1. Sneddon L.U. Comparative Physiology of Nociception and Pain. Physiology. 2018;33:63–73. doi: 10.1152/physiol.00022.2017. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources