Antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory effects of Brazilian red propolis extract and XXXX in rodents.

@entity8137 @entity2194 @entity3264 @entity298 @entity19 @entity4 @entity406 @entity158 @entity8138 @entity6400 @entity1543
ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: Propolis has been used as a folk medicine for centuries around the world due to its wide spectrum of biological activities. The red propolis, a new Brazilian variety of this apimaterial, has presented an unusual chemical composition, including @entity6400 such as @entity8137 and @entity8138 . Since both the green and red varieties of propolis are traditionally used as medicine and commercialized with no label differentiation, the study of the activities of red propolis extract has become important in order to clarify whether this product has the same activities as commercial ones. In this work, we demonstrated the potential action of the @entity2194 ( @entity2194 ) and its biomarker, @entity8137 , as antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory drugs on experimental models. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The @entity2194 was chemically characterised by HPLC/DAD analyses. The biological activities of the @entity2194 (3, 10, and 30mg/kg) and @entity8137 (10mg/kg) were evaluated using the antinociceptive ( @entity1543 , @entity406 , and @entity3264 injections) and anti-inflammatory (carrageenan-induced hindpaw @entity4 and @entity298 ) models in @entity19 after oral administration. The open field test was also performed. RESULTS: @entity8137 , one of the main biomarker of red propolis, was identified in the @entity2194 (21.62mg/g). Pretreatment with the @entity2194 (10 and 30mg/kg) and @entity8137 (10mg/kg) produced reduction (P<0.001) in the number of abdominal writhes, but the @entity2194 was more effective (P<0.001) than @entity8137 . In the @entity406 test, all @entity2194 doses (3, 10, and 30mg/kg, P<0.001) inhibited the late phase ( @entity158 ) of @entity406 -induced licking, but the @entity158 was observed only when the higher doses (10 and 30mg/kg; P<0.05) were used. @entity8137 caused inhibition (P<0.001) only in the second phase of @entity406 -induced nociception similarly at all @entity2194 doses in the same phase of the test. The responses in @entity3264 -induced model presented crescent inhibition (P<0.05) with 10 and 30mg/kg of @entity2194 . Also, @entity8137 inhibited (P<0.001) the nociception induced by @entity3264 similarly to 30mg/kg of @entity2194 . There were no significant differences in the open field test after @entity2194 administration, but @entity8137 decrease the spontaneous motor behaviour. Regarding the anti-inflammatory assessment, the @entity2194 (10 and 30mg/kg, P<0.05) and @entity8137 (P<0.001) treatments caused a significant inhibition of the @entity4 response. All doses of @entity2194 (3, 10, and 30mg/kg, P<0.05) and @entity8137 (P<0.001) also inhibited the carrageenan-induced leukocyte migration. In both cases, the results for the @entity2194 at 30mg/kg and @entity8137 were similar. CONCLUSIONS: The @entity2194 and @entity8137 presented significant anti-inflammatory activity. Moreover, the @entity2194 presented antinociceptive action on inflammatory and @entity158 without motor side effects, possibly due to the action of other constituents present in the extract. These results, together, support the popular usage of this natural product.
