Search

Ethnopharmacological Relevance: Aloysia gratissima leaves are popularly used to treat respiratory, digestive, and nervous system disorders. Several studies have been carried out to determine the biological activity of A. gratissima, such as its antibacterial and anti-edematogenic activities, but despite the beneficial uses of A. gratissima, few studies have examined the toxicological profile of this plant., Aim of the Study: This study aimed to determine the chemical composition, cytotoxic, genotoxic, mutagenic potential, and antioxidant activity of an aqueous extract of A. gratissima leaves (AG-AEL)., Material and Methods: The phytochemical constitution of AG-AEL was assessed by colorimetric analyses and High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). The inorganic elements were detected by Particle-Induced X-ray Emission (PIXE). The antioxidant, cytotoxicity, genotoxic, and mutagenic activities were evaluated in vitro by Di(phenyl)-(2,4,6-trinitrophenyl)iminoazanium (DPPH), Sulforhodamine B (SRB) assay, comet assay, and Salmonella/microsome assays., Results: AG-AEL indicated the presence of terpenoids, flavonoids, and phenolic acids. HPLC detected rutin at 2.41 ± 0.33 mg/100 mg. PIXE analysis indicated the presence of Mg, Si, P, S, K, Ca, Mn, and Zn. The 50% inhibitory concentration was 84.17 ± 3.17 μg/mL in the DPPH assay. Genotoxic effects were observed using the Comet assay in neuroblastoma (SH-SY5Y) cells and mutations were observed in TA102 and TA97a strains. The extract showed cytotoxic activities against ovarian (OVCAR-3), glioblastoma (U87MG), and colon (HT-29) cancer cell lines., Conclusions: In conclusion, AG-AEL increased DNA damage, induced frameshift, and oxidative mutations, and showed cytotoxic activities against different cancer cells. The in vitro toxicological effects observed suggest that this plant preparation should be used with caution, despite its pharmacological potential., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Motor dominance is well established, but sensory dominance is much less clear. We therefore studied the cortical evoked magnetic fields using magnetoencephalography (MEG) in a group of 20 healthy right handed subjects in order to examine whether standard electrical stimulation of the median and ulnar nerve demonstrated sensory lateralization. The global field power (GFP) curves, as an indication of cortical activation, did not depict sensory lateralization to the dominant left hemisphere. Comparison of the M20, M30, and M70 peak latencies and GFP values exhibited no statistical differences between the hemispheres, indicating no sensory hemispherical dominance at these latencies for each nerve. Field maps at these latencies presented a first and second polarity reversal for both median and ulnar stimulation. Spatial dipole position parameters did not reveal statistical left-right differences at the M20, M30 and M70 peaks for both nerves. Neither did the dipolar strengths at M20, M30 and M70 show a statistical left-right difference for both nerves. Finally, the Laterality Indices of the M20, M30 and M70 strengths did not indicate complete lateralization to one of the hemispheres. After electrical median and ulnar nerve stimulation no evidence was found for sensory hand dominance in brain responses of either hand, as measured by MEG. The results can provide a new assessment of patients with sensory dysfunctions or perceptual distortion when sensory dominance occurs way beyond the estimated norm.

Contralateral somatosensory evoked fields (SEF) by whole head MEG after unilateral median and ulnar nerve stimulation of both hands were studied in 10 healthy right-handed subjects. Major parameters describing cortical activity were examined to discriminate median and ulnar nerve evoked responses. Somatic sensitivity showed high similarity in the 4 study conditions for both hand and nerve. The brain SEFs consisted of 7-8 major peak stages with consistent responses in all subjects at M20, M30, M70 and M90. Comparable inter-hemispheric waveform profile but high inter-subject variability was found. Median nerve induced significantly shorter latencies in the early activities than those of the ulnar nerve. The 3D cortical maps in the post stimulus 450 ms timeframe showed for both nerves two polarity reversals, an early and a late one which is a new finding. Dipole characteristics showed differential sites for the M20 and M30 in the respective nerve. Higher dipole moments evoked by the median nerve were noticed when compared to the ulnar. Furthermore, the results of the dipole distances between both nerves for M20 were calculated to be at 11.17 mm +/- 4.93 (LH) and 16.73 mm +/- 5.66 (RH), respectively after right hand versus left hand stimulation. This study showed substantial differences in the cortical responses between median and ulnar nerve. Especially the dipole distance between median and ulnar nerve on the cortex was computed accurately for the first time in MEG. Little is known however of the cortical responses in chronic pain patients and the parameter(s) that may change in an individual patient or a group. These results provide precise basis for further evaluating cortical changes in functional disorders and disease sequelae related to median and ulnar nerves.

We examined the contralateral hemispheric cortical activity in MEG (151 ch) after unilateral median nerve stimulation of the right and left hand in twenty healthy right-handed subjects. The goal was to establish parameters to describe cortical activity of the hemispheric responses and to study the potential ability to assess differences in volunteers and patients. We focused on the within-subject similarity and differences between evoked fields in both hands. Cortical activity was characterized by the overlay display of waveforms (CWP), number of peak stages, loci of focal maxima and minima in each stage, 3D topographic maps and exemplified equivalent current dipole characteristics. The paired-wise test was used to analyze the hemispheric differences. The waveform morphology was unique across the subjects, similar CWPs were noted in both hemispheres of the individual. The contralateral hemispheric responses showed a well defined temporal-spatial activation of six to seven stages in the 500 ms window. Consistently (in over 80% of subjects), the six stages across the subjects were 20M, 30M, 50M, 70M, 90M, and 150M. A 240M was present in the left hemisphere (LH) in 15/20 subjects and in the right hemisphere (RH) in 10/20. Statistics of the latencies and amplitudes of these seven stages were calculated. Our results indicated that the latency was highly consistent and exhibited no statistical mean difference for all stages. Furthermore, no mean amplitude differences between both hemispheres at each stage were found. The patterns of magnetic fields in both hemispheres were consistent in 70% of the subjects. A laterality index (L.I.) was used for defining the magnetic field amplitude differences between two hemispheres for each individual. Overall, the absolute amplitude of the brain responses was larger in the left than in the right hemisphere in the majority of subjects (16/20), yet a significant portion (4/20) exhibited right dominance of the N20m activity. Each individual exhibited a unique CWP, there was reliable consistency of peak latencies and mean amplitudes in median nerve MEG. Nevertheless, this study indicates the limitations of using the intact hemisphere responses to compare with those from the affected (brain) side and suggests caution in assuming full homology in the cortical organization of both hemispheres. This study provides some results to address clinical issues like which parameter describes individual differences best. Whether a genuine difference is found or whether any difference may simply represent the variability encountered in a normal population.