OBJECTIVES: To explore the therapeutic mechanism of Guizhi Fuling (GZFL) Pellets against cervical cancer. METHODS: Publicly available databases were used to identify the targets of GZFL Pellets and cervical cancer to construct the protein-protein interaction (PPI) network, followed by GO biological process and KEGG pathway enrichment analysis of the hub genes. The "Traditional Chinese Medicine-Active Ingredients-Targets-Pathways" network for GZFL Pellets in cervical cancer treatment was generated using Cytoscape v10.0.0, and molecular docking of the drug and potential targets was performed to predict the specific targets of active components in Guizhi Fuling Pellets. The inhibitory effects of hederagenin, an active ingredient in GZFL Pellets, was tested in cultured cervical cancer cells and in nude mice bearing cervical cancer xenografts. RESULTS: GZFL Pellets contain 338 active components targeting 247 action sites. A total of 10127 cervical cancer-related targets were obtained, and among them 195 were identified as potential therapeutic targets of GZFL Pellets for cervical cancer treatment, including the key targets of GABRA1, PTK2, JAK2, HTR3A, GSR, and IL-17. Molecular docking study showed low binding energies of the active components such as hederagenin, campesterol, and stigmasterol for protein-molecule interaction. GO enrichment analysis suggested that GZFL Pellets inhibited cervical cancer primarily by regulating responses to steroid hormones, oxidative stress, and lipopolysaccharides. Among the active components of GZFL Pellets, hederagenin was found to inhibit cervical cancer cells in vitro and significantly reduced STAT3 phosphorylation level in the cancer cells. In nude mice bearing cervical cancer xenografts, hederagenin effectively inhibited tumor growth rate without causing obvious adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS GZFL Pellets inhibit cervical cancer cell growth through its multiple active components that target different pathways. Among these components, hederagenin inhibits tumor cell growth possibly by directly binding to JAK2 protein to inhibit STAT3 phosphorylation.
Female ; Animals ; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/pathology* ; Mice, Nude ; Humans ; Mice ; Oleanolic Acid/therapeutic use* ; Drugs, Chinese Herbal/therapeutic use* ; Molecular Docking Simulation ; Xenograft Model Antitumor Assays ; Cell Line, Tumor ; STAT3 Transcription Factor/metabolism* ; Protein Interaction Maps ; Janus Kinase 2/metabolism*

Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of twice-daily tacrolimus (Tacrolimus BID; Prograf) vs once-daily prolonged release tacrolimus (Tacrolimus QD; Advagraf), combined with steroids and mycophenolate mofetil in preventing acute rejection in De Novo renal transplantation patients. Methods 241 patients from 11 centers were randomized into two groups with 3 months observation period post-transplantation. Advagraf was administered as a single oral dose in the morning (initially 0. 1-0. 15 mg/kg every day) and Prograf was administered in two equal oral doses 12h apart (initially 0. 1-0. 15 mg/kg). Study visits were scheduled for days 1, 3, 7, 14, 28, 56, 84post-transplantion. The efficacy, safety, compliance and adverse effects were compared between two groups. Results Totally 223 patients completed the study. The two groups were comparable in age,gender and primary disease. There were 12 episodes of acute rejection in each group. There was no graft loss or patient death in both groups. The incidence of drug related adverse events was 32. 1 %and 33. 3% respectively in the control and experimental groups. Dosage was decreased in both groups and there was significant difference in each group. The trough level was similar at the initiate period.Twenty-eight days post-transplantation the trough level in the Advagraf group was lower than in the Prograf group. Conclusion Advagraf has the same efficacy, safety and drug related adverse effects as Prograf. It is practical and feasible for Advagraf substitute for Prograf in clinical practice.