[Current research situation of nephrotoxicity of Chinese herbal medicine].

To provide the basis for the future research on the nephrotoxicity of Chinese herbal medicine through systematic and comprehensive summary of all the Chinese herbal medicines which may lead to nephrotoxicity. Foreign resources included PubMed and Cochrane library， and domestic research resources was China Food and Drug Administration(CDFA) Adverse Drug Reaction Monitoring Center database. The databases were searched from establishment to January 1， 2017. There was no limitation on research type. 28 English studies were found， including 97 Chinese herbs or prescriptions with the risk of nephrotoxicity. The following six Chinese herbal medicines with the risk of nephrotoxicity had a large number of studies： aristolochic acid(5 studies)， Tripterygium wilfordii(4 studies)， Erycibe obtusifolia(2 studies)， Rheum palmatum(2 studies)， Ephedra sinica(2 studies)， and Atractylodes lances(2 studies). The remaining 91 Chinese medicines were reported with risk of nephrotoxicity in only 1 study respectively. CDFA reported 16 Chinese herbal medicines with the risk of nephrotoxicity， including Ganmaoqing Pian(capsule)， Zhenju Jiangya Pian， T. wilfordii preparation， Vc-Yinqiao Pian， Chuanhuning injection， Shuanghuanglian injection， Qingkailing injection， Lianbizhi injection， herbal decoction containing Aristolochiae Radix， Guanxin Suhe Wan， Shugan Liqi Wan， Ershiwuwei Songshi Wan， herbal decoction containing Aristolochia Fangchi， herbal granules containing root of Kaempfer Dutchmanspipe， Ganmaotong(tablets)， and Longdan Xiegan Wan. Currently， in addition to aristolochic acids， the most reported Chinese herbal medicine with the risk of nephrotoxicity is T. wilfordii preparation.

Cardiotoxicity of Ma Huang/caffeine or ephedrine/caffeine in a rodent model system.

Ma Huang (equivalent to 0, 12.5, 25, or 50 mg/kg ephedrine) or ephedrine (0, 6.25, 12.5, 25 mg/kg) were administered as one bolus oral dose to male F344 rats with and without caffeine. The herbal medicine Ma Huang (ephedra) in combination with caffeine caused rapid clinical signs of toxicity including salivation, hyperactivity, ataxia, and eventually lethargy, and failure to respond to stimuli. When this syndrome of clinical signs emerged, animals were moribund sacrificed, and a histological analysis for heart lesions performed. Cardiotoxicity included hemorrhage, necrosis, and degeneration in the ventricles or interventricular septum within 2-4 hours after treatment with Ma Huang (ephedra)/caffeine or ephedrine (the principal active component in Ma Huang)/caffeine. There was a steep dose response curve for cardiotoxicity with minimal toxicity seen at levels of Ma Huang (equivalent to 12.5 mg/kg ephedrine) with caffeine. However, cardiotoxic lesions occurred in 28% of animals with Ma Huang dosages equivalent to 25 mg/kg ephedrine with 15 or 30 mg/kg caffeine, and in 90% of animals at Ma Huang exposures equivalent to 50 mg/kg ephedrine with 15 or 30 mg/kg caffeine. Cardiotoxic lesions occurred in 47% of animals in the 25 mg/kg ephedrine groups with caffeine at 7.25, 15, or 30 mg/kg. There was no statistical difference in the occurrence of cardiotoxic lesions when 15 or 30 mg/kg caffeine was combined with Ma Huang equivalent to 25 or 50 mg/kg ephedrine; likewise there was no statistical difference in the occurrence of cardiotoxic lesions when 7.25, 15, or 30 mg/kg caffeine was combined with 25 mg/kg ephedrine. These results show that the cardiotoxic effects of the herbal medicine, Ma Huang, are similar to that of ephedrine, the principal active ingredient in the herbal medicine. The combination of Ma Huang or ephedrine with caffeine enhanced the cardiotoxicity over that with the herbal medicine or the active ingredient alone.

The severity of toxic reactions to ephedra: comparisons to other botanical products and national trends from 1993-2002.

OBJECTIVE: Ephedra is a botanical product widely used to enhance alertness, as a weight loss aide, and as a decongestant. Its reported adverse effects led the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ban ephedra-containing products in the United States in 2004. This study's purpose was to compare toxicity from botanical products containing ephedra to nonephedra products. METHODS: The Toxic Exposure Surveillance System (TESS), a national poison center database, was utilized to determine the number and outcomes of cases involving botanical products reported from 1993-2002. Cases listing both a botanical product and any other drugs or chemicals were excluded a priori. Ten-year hazard rates (moderate outcomes + major outcomes + deaths per 1000 exposures) were used to compare botanical product categories. RESULTS: There were 21,533 toxic exposures with definitive medical outcomes reported over the 10 yrs where a botanical product was the only substance involved. Of these, 4306 (19.9%) had moderate or major medical outcomes and there were two deaths, for an overall hazard score of 200 per 1000 exposures. The number of ephedra reports to poison centers increased 150-fold over the 10-yr period. The hazard rate for products that contained only ephedra was 250 per 1000 exposures and 267 per 1000 exposures for products that contained ephedra and additional ingredients; whereas the hazard score for only nonephedra botanical products was 96 per 1000 exposures. The rate ratios for multibotanical products with ephedra (RR 1.33; 95% C.I. 1.27-1.40) and for single-ingredient ephedra products (RR 1.25; 95% C.I. 1.11-1.40) were both two to six times higher than those of other common botanical products. Yohimbe-containing products had the highest hazard score (417) and rate ratio (2.08; 95% C.I. 1.59-2.80). CONCLUSION: Ephedra-containing botanical products accounted for a significant number of toxic exposures with severe medical outcomes reported to poison centers. Hazard rate analysis suggests poison center-reported events involving ephedra-containing botanical products were much more likely to result in severe medical outcomes than those involving nonephedra-containing botanical products. These data support recommendations by policymakers that the sale of ephedra should be prohibited to protect consumers. Our data suggest that the botanical product, yohimbe, may also be associated with unacceptably high risks of toxicity and should receive close scrutiny from health policymakers.

High prevalence of potentially hepatotoxic herbal supplement use in patients with fulminant hepatic failure.

HYPOTHESIS: The use of potentially hepatotoxic herbal and dietary supplements is highly prevalent in the fulminant hepatic failure (FHF) patient population at our institution, and this subgroup of patients has a worse prognosis. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. Settings An adult tertiary care university hospital and a Veterans Affairs hospital in Oregon. PATIENTS: All patients referred to the liver transplantation service for FHF from January 2001 through October 2002 (N = 20). We defined FHF as onset of encephalopathy within 8 weeks of onset of jaundice in the absence of preexisting liver disease. All patients underwent investigation for potential causes of liver injury. Potentially hepatotoxic supplements were defined as those with previously published reports of hepatic injury related to their use. RESULTS: Ten patients (50%) were recent or active users of potentially hepatotoxic supplements or herbs; 10 had no history of supplement use. In the supplement group, 7 patients (35%) had no other identified cause for hepatic failure. Six patients in the supplement group and 2 patients in the nonsupplement group underwent orthotopic liver transplantation. Five patients in each group died. There were no significant differences in transplantation rate (P =.07) or survival (P>.99) between groups. Supplement use alone accounted for the most cases of FHF during this period, exceeding acetaminophen toxicity and viral hepatitis. CONCLUSIONS: Herbal and dietary supplements were potential hepatotoxins in a high proportion of patients with FHF at our institution. Enhanced public awareness of the potential hepatotoxicity of these commonly used agents and increased regulatory oversight of their use is strongly urged.