ABSTRACT
Graphical abstract Natural products play an irreplaceable role in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nevertheless, the underlying molecular mechanisms involved remain elusive. To better understand their potential therapeutic effects, more validation studies are needed to explore underlying mechanisms systematically. This study aims to explore the potential targets of action and signaling pathways of cepharanthine for the treatment of COVID-19. This study revealed that a total of 173 potential targets of action for Cepharanthine and 86 intersectional targets for Cepharanthine against COVID-19 were screened and collected. Gene Ontology enrichment analysis suggested that inflammatory, immune cell and enzyme activities were the critical terms for cepharanthine against COVID-19. Pathway enrichment analysis showed that five pathways associated with COVID-19 were the main signaling pathways for the treatment of COVID-19 via cepharanthine. Molecular docking and molecular dynamics simulations suggested that 6 core targets were regarded as potential targets for cepharanthine against COVID-19. In brief, the study demonstrates that cepharanthine may play an important role in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection through its harmonious activity against SARS-CoV-2 pathways and multiple related targets. This article provides valuable insights required to respond effectively to concerns of western medical community.
ABSTRACT
Natural products play an irreplaceable role in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nevertheless, the underlying molecular mechanisms involved remain elusive. To better understand their potential therapeutic effects, more validation studies are needed to explore underlying mechanisms systematically. This study aims to explore the potential targets of action and signaling pathways of cepharanthine for the treatment of COVID-19. This study revealed that a total of 173 potential targets of action for Cepharanthine and 86 intersectional targets for Cepharanthine against COVID-19 were screened and collected. Gene Ontology enrichment analysis suggested that inflammatory, immune cell and enzyme activities were the critical terms for cepharanthine against COVID-19. Pathway enrichment analysis showed that five pathways associated with COVID-19 were the main signaling pathways for the treatment of COVID-19 via cepharanthine. Molecular docking and molecular dynamics simulations suggested that 6 core targets were regarded as potential targets for cepharanthine against COVID-19. In brief, the study demonstrates that cepharanthine may play an important role in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection through its harmonious activity against SARS-CoV-2 pathways and multiple related targets. This article provides valuable insights required to respond effectively to concerns of western medical community.
ABSTRACT
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and its resulting disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has spread to millions of people worldwide. Preliminary data from organ transplant recipients have shown reduced seroconversion rates after the administration of different SARS-CoV-2 vaccination platforms. However, it is unknown whether different vaccination platforms provide different levels of protection against SARS-CoV-2. To answer this question, we prospectively studied 431 kidney and liver transplant recipients (kidney: n=230; liver: n=201) who received either the ChAdOx1 vaccine (n=148) or the BNT-162b2 vaccine (n=283) and underwent an assessment of immunoglobulin M/immunoglobulin G spike antibody levels. The primary objective of the study is to directly compare the efficacy of two different vaccine platforms in solid organ transplant recipients by measuring of immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies against the RBD of the spike protein (anti-RBD) two weeks after first and second doses. Our secondary endpoints were solicited specific local or systemic adverse events within 7 days after the receipt of each dose of the vaccine. There was no difference in the primary outcome between the two vaccine platforms in patients who received two vaccine doses. Unresponsiveness was mainly linked to diabetes. The rate of response after the first dose among younger older patients was significantly larger; however, after the second dose this difference did not persist (p = 0.079). Side effects were similar to those that were observed during the pivotal trials.