Fibrosis is a destructive, but reversible outcome of chronic liver diseases (
22). Until now, a few antifibrogenic drugs have been developed, however none received final approval from the FDA (
23). Traditional herbal medicines such as silymarin, silybin A and 18α-glycyrrhizin have been used to treat a number of liver diseases (
20,
24). Various evidences from in vitro and clinical studies suggest that silymarin and its major constituent, silybin A, have therapeutic potential for various liver diseases such as fatty liver, toxic hepatitis and virus induced fibrosis (
21,
27,
28). The effects of 18α-glycyrrhizin on alleviation of hepatocyte injury and fibrosis reduction have been reported. 28 Various studies investigated the effects of these components on HSCs (
29-
31). HSCs manipulation, including apoptosis induction, down regulation of fibrogenic genes and subversion of the activation state might postpone fibrosis progression (
2). Jia et al. reported that silymarin down-regulated procollagen alpha 1 (I) and TIMP-1 gene expressions in rats with biliary fibrosis (
32). A decreased expression of procollagen alpha 1 (I), TGF-β1, TIMP-1 and MMP2 was also detected in HSCs treated with a new silybin-phosphatidylcholine-vitamin E complex (
33). In cultured HSCs, glycyrrhetinic acid inhibited COLI synthesis mostly at the gene transcription level (
34). Despite the existence of information regarding the antifibrotic effects of silymarin, silybin A and 18α-glycyrrhizin metabolites, to the best of our knowledge, no study has compared the effects of these substances. In the present study, we sought to determine the most effective antifibrogenic of these components on TGF-β1-activated LX-2 cells. Initially, we measured the antiproliferative effects of silymarin, silybin A and 18α-glycyrrhizin on activated LX-2 cells and release of TGF-β1. To better understand the mode of action, we treated HSCs with these components before (prophylactic manner) and after (therapeutic manner) activation of cells by TGF-β1. The results of this study would possibly clarify what types of treatments could potentially be more effective for early (susceptible individuals) or late (involved patients) fibrosis.
As a route of control, the antiproliferative effects of silymarin, silybin A and 18α-glycyrrhizin on HSCs seem to be valuable, especially after HCSs activation. However, their safety should be considered on quiescent HSCs. Our results showed that these components had no significant effect on the viability of inactivated HSCs at concentrations up to 50 μg/mL. Therefore, we used 25 and 50 µg/mL of silymarin, silybin A and 18α-glycyrrhizin in order to determine their possible antiproliferative activities on activated LX-2 cells. According to our results, all three components exhibited antiproliferative effects on activated HSCs following the therapeutic application. Silybin A significantly reduced activated LX-2 proliferation under both therapeutic and prophylactic conditions, whereas the two other components failed to exhibit similar effects in the prophylactic experiment. Silymarin and 18α-glycyrrhizin suppressed activated HSCs growth only in the therapeutic experiment. In a previous in vitro experiment, Zong et al. showed that 18α-glycyrrhizin had a suppressive effect on LX-2 cells.15 Similarly, Qu et al. reported that 18α-glycyrrhizin could suppress HSCs activation and induce their apoptosis by inhibiting nuclear factor (NF)-kB translocation into the nucleus in rats with liver fibrosis (
35). Silymarin, at the therapeutic dose, inhibited the fibrogenetic mechanism and progression of initial liver fibrosis in rats (
36). With respect to silybin, Trappoliere et al. demonstrated that this component in a dose-dependent manner inhibited in vitro proliferation of PDGF activated HSCs isolated from the human liver and decreased production of extracellular matrix proteins (
27). As our results showed, all components suppressed HSCs activation under therapeutic conditions, however silybin A only showed significant control over LX-2 cell proliferation during the prophylactic condition. In line with these results, all three components reduced production of TGF-β1, the major player in the process of fibrosis. Silybin A was the most effective under both prophylactic and therapeutic conditions.
Gene expression analysis also demonstrated a different pattern of fibrogenic gene expression following the prophylactic and therapeutic experiments. We found that all components in the therapeutic approach could down-regulate fibrogenic genes. Silybin A and 18α-glycirrhizin caused greater decreases in COLIA1 and TIMP-1 mRNA levels during therapeutic treatment. On the other hand in prophylactic condition, although silymarin, silybin A and 18α-glycyrrhizin caused various reductions in MMP-2, the results were inconsistent with the therapeutic experiment. Silymarin showed the most impressive role for controlling fibrogenic gene expressions, whereas silybin A and 18α-glycyrrhizin showed less effect on COLIA1 and TIMP-1.
The TGF-β1 production is a suitable marker of HSC activation and its decrease by the components is an indication of their antifibrogenic effects.6 Treatment with silybin A and 18α-glycyrrhizin in the therapeutic experiment and their impact on TGF-β1 release have supported the results found with gene expression analysis. Accordingly, silybin A and 18α-glycyrrhizin showed greater suppression of TGF-β1 release. Although in the prophylactic experiment, silybin A was the only compound that decreased cell proliferation. However, it was less effective on reducing fibrogenic gene expressions compared to silymarin. Silymarin was less effective to reduce TGF-β1 release but more effective on inhibition of COLIA1 and TIMP-1 expressions.
These differences in the results between the effects of components could be due to differences in their mode of action and their effects via different intracellular signalling pathways that mediate fibrogenesis. Further studies are required to identify the various molecular mechanisms responsible for antifibrogenic action of these components. The impacts of these herbal components on fibrosis have been frequently investigated by other investigators. Data dissecting and a comparison of their roles under therapeutic and prophylactic conditions will help to determine the conditions under which they are more effective.