ABSTRACT
Objective To analyze the main active components and potential molecular mechanism of Sophora flavescens against breast cancer based on network pharmacology and molecular docking. Methods The chemical constituents were collected and screened by TCMSP, ETCM database and literature review. The targets of active ingredients were predicted by Swiss Target Prediction database. Breast cancer-related targets were collected by GeneCards, TTD, Drugbank and OMIM. The anti-breast cancer targets of Sophora flavescens were screened by Venny 2.1.0 software. Cytoscape software was used to construct the network diagram of Sophora flavescens-key active ingredients-targets. STRING database was used to analyze the common targets, and PPI network diagram was constructed. GO function enrichment analysis and KEGG pathway enrichment analysis of key target proteins were performed by DAVID database and Hiplot online platform. Schrodinger software was used to calculate the molecular docking between the active ingredients and targets. Molecular biological methods were used to verify the key targets. Results A total of 36 active components with clear structures were screened from Sophora flavescens. 70 anti-breast cancer targets of Sophora flavescens were screened out. 12 core targets including EGFR, AKT1, ESR1, SRC, CYP19A1, AR and ABCB1 participate in endocrine resistance, EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors and estrogen signaling pathways in breast cancer. Moreover, the docking score between the core component and the key target AR is the highest. In vitro experiments showed that the extract of Sophora flavescens can inhibit the proliferation of breast cancer cells, induce cell apoptosis and up-regulate AR protein expression. Conclusion It was revealed that Sophora flavescens plays an anti-breast cancer role by regulating complex biological processes through multiple components acting on multiple targets and signaling pathways. The upregulation of AR protein by Sophora flavescens may become a new therapeutic strategy for the treatment of breast cancer.
ABSTRACT
Purpose@#We aimed to identify the anterolateral ligament (ALL) tears in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-deficient knees using standard 1.5-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). @*Methods@#We included all patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction at our center between 2012 and 2015. Exclusion criteria included patients with multiple ligament injuries, lateral collateral ligament, posterolateral corner, and infections, and patients who underwent MRI more than 2 months after their injury. All patients (n = 148) had ACL tears that were subsequently arthroscopically reconstructed. The magnetic resonance (MR) images of the injured knees performed within 2 months of injury were reviewed by a musculoskeletal radiologist and an orthopedic surgeon. The patients were divided into two groups. The first group of patients had MRI performed within 1 month of injury. The second group of patients had MRI performed 1–2 months after the index injury. Both assessors were blinded and the MR mages were read separately to assess the presence of ALL, presence of a tear and the location of the tear. Based on their readings, interobserver agreement (kappa statistic (K)), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were compared. @*Results@#The ALL was identified in 100% of the patients. However, there was a discrepancy of up to 15% in the identification of tear of the ALL. In the first group in which MRI scans were performed within 1 month of injury, the ALL tear was identified by the radiologist in 92% of patients and by the surgeon in 90% of patients (Κ = 0.86). In the second group in which MRI scans were performed within 1–2 months of the injury, the ALL tear was identified by the radiologist in 78% of patients and by the surgeon in 93% of patients (K = 0.62). @*Conclusion@#The ALL can be accurately identified on MRI, but the presence and location of ALL tear and its location cannot be reliably identified on MRI. The accuracy in identification and characterization of a tear was affected by the interval between the time of injury and the time when the MRI was performed.Level of evidence: Diagnostic, level IIIb, retrospective.
ABSTRACT
Purpose@#We aimed to identify the anterolateral ligament (ALL) tears in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-deficient knees using standard 1.5-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). @*Methods@#We included all patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction at our center between 2012 and 2015. Exclusion criteria included patients with multiple ligament injuries, lateral collateral ligament, posterolateral corner, and infections, and patients who underwent MRI more than 2 months after their injury. All patients (n = 148) had ACL tears that were subsequently arthroscopically reconstructed. The magnetic resonance (MR) images of the injured knees performed within 2 months of injury were reviewed by a musculoskeletal radiologist and an orthopedic surgeon. The patients were divided into two groups. The first group of patients had MRI performed within 1 month of injury. The second group of patients had MRI performed 1–2 months after the index injury. Both assessors were blinded and the MR mages were read separately to assess the presence of ALL, presence of a tear and the location of the tear. Based on their readings, interobserver agreement (kappa statistic (K)), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were compared. @*Results@#The ALL was identified in 100% of the patients. However, there was a discrepancy of up to 15% in the identification of tear of the ALL. In the first group in which MRI scans were performed within 1 month of injury, the ALL tear was identified by the radiologist in 92% of patients and by the surgeon in 90% of patients (Κ = 0.86). In the second group in which MRI scans were performed within 1–2 months of the injury, the ALL tear was identified by the radiologist in 78% of patients and by the surgeon in 93% of patients (K = 0.62). @*Conclusion@#The ALL can be accurately identified on MRI, but the presence and location of ALL tear and its location cannot be reliably identified on MRI. The accuracy in identification and characterization of a tear was affected by the interval between the time of injury and the time when the MRI was performed.Level of evidence: Diagnostic, level IIIb, retrospective.