Assessment of Herb-Drug Interaction Potential of Five Common Species of Licorice and Their Phytochemical Constituents

The dried roots and rhizomes of Glycyrrhiza species (G. glabra, G. uralensis and G. inflata), commonly known as licorice, have long been used in traditional medicine. In addition, two other species, G. echinata and G. lepidota are also considered "licorice" in select markets. Currently, licorice is an integral part of several botanical drugs and dietary supplements. To probe the botanicals' safety, herb-drug interaction potential of the hydroethanolic extracts of five Glycyrrhiza species and their key constituents was investigated by determining their effects on pregnane X receptor, aryl hydrocarbon receptor, two major cytochrome P450 isoforms (CYP3A4 and CYP1A2), and the metabolic clearance of antiviral drugs. All extracts enhanced transcriptional activity of PXR and AhR (>2-fold) and increased the enzyme activity of CYP3A4 and CYP1A2. The highest increase in CYP3A4 was seen with G. echinata (4-fold), and the highest increase in CYP1A2 was seen with G. uralensis (18-fold) and G. inflata (16-fold). Among the constituents, glabridin, licoisoflavone A, glyasperin C, and glycycoumarin activated PXR and AhR, glabridin being the most effective (6- and 27-fold increase, respectively). Licoisoflavone A, glyasperin C, and glycycoumarin increased CYP3A4 activity while glabridin, glyasperin C, glycycoumarin, and formononetin increased CYP1A2 activity (>2-fold). The metabolism of antiretroviral drugs (rilpivirine and dolutegravir) was increased by G. uralensis (2.0 and 2.5-fold) and its marker compound glycycoumarin (2.3 and 1.6-fold). The metabolism of dolutegravir was also increased by G. glabra (2.8-fold) but not by its marker compound, glabridin. These results suggest that licorice and its phytochemicals could affect the metabolism and clearance of certain drugs that are substrates of CYP3A4 and CYP1A2.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/19390211.2022.2050875 .

Herb-Drug Interactions: Worlds Intersect with the Patient at the Center

This review examines three bodies of literature related to herb-drug interactions: case reports, clinical studies, evaluations found in six drug interaction checking resources. The aim of the study is to examine the congruity of resources and to assess the degree to which case reports signal for further study. A qualitative review of case reports seeks to determine needs and perspectives of case report authors. Methods: Systematic search of Medline identified clinical studies and case reports of interacting herb-drug combinations. Interacting herb-drug pairs were searched in six drug interaction resources. Case reports were analyzed qualitatively for completeness and to identify underlying themes. Results: Ninety-nine case-report documents detailed 107 cases. Sixty-five clinical studies evaluated 93 mechanisms of interaction relevant to herbs reported in case studies, involving 30 different herbal products; 52.7% of these investigations offered evidence supporting reported reactions. Cohen's kappa found no agreement between any interaction checker and case report corpus. Case reports often lacked full information. Need for further information, attitudes about herbs and herb use, and strategies to reduce risk from interaction were three primary themes in the case report corpus. Conclusions: Reliable herb-drug information is needed, including open and respectful discussion with patients.

Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of the Herbal Formula PM014 in a Cisplatin- and Paclitaxel-Treated Tumor-Bearing Mouse Model

PM014 (HL301) is a standardized herbal mixture derived from a traditional Korean medicine, Chung-Sang-Bo-Ha-Tang. Previously, we reported that PM014 treatment significantly suppressed pulmonary fibrosis, one of the frequent adverse effects of anticancer therapy in lung cancer. Before the clinical application of PM014 in anticancer therapy, the safety and efficacy of PM014 in combination with conventional anticancer drugs should be addressed to determine whether PM014 can be used in lung cancer. Lewis lung cancer–bearing mice were injected with 10 mg/kg of cisplatin or paclitaxel on day 5. Starting on day 7, the mice were administered 200 mg/kg PM014 every 2 days. On day 15, all mice were assessed by biochemical and histological analyses. PM014 did not block the antitumor activity of cisplatin and paclitaxel. Coadministration of PM014 and antitumor agents did not elevate the aspartate transaminase/alanine transaminase ratio or the blood urea nitrogen/creatinine ratio. Histopathological analysis also showed that PM014 did not induce hepatic or renal injury. Moreover, PM014 had no apparent inhibitory effects on drug metabolizing enzymes, indicating that PM014 did not alter the pharmacokinetics of chemotherapeutic drugs. Overall, these data show the safety and compatibility of combination therapy of PM014 and chemotherapies for the treatment of lung cancer.