ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Pharmacol., 10 July 2020

Sec. Ethnopharmacology

Volume 11 - 2020 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2020.01035

Uncovering the Complexity Mechanism of Different Formulas Treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis Based on a Novel Network Pharmacology Model

  • 1. Modern Research Center for Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanxi University, Taiyuan, China

  • 2. Institute of Integrated Bioinformedicine and Translational Science, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

  • 3. Institute of Basic Research in Clinical Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China

  • 4. Department of Ultrasound, Eighth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China

  • 5. Institute of Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China

  • 6. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China

  • 7. Guangdong Key Laboratory of Single Cell Technology and Application, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China

Abstract

Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) with the characteristics of “multi-component-multi-target-multi-pathway” has obvious advantages in the prevention and treatment of complex diseases, especially in the aspects of “treating the same disease with different treatments”. However, there are still some problems such as unclear substance basis and molecular mechanism of the effectiveness of formula. Network pharmacology is a new strategy based on system biology and poly-pharmacology, which could observe the intervention of drugs on disease networks at systematical and comprehensive level, and especially suitable for study of complex TCM systems. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory autoimmune disease, causing articular and extra articular dysfunctions among patients, it could lead to irreversible joint damage or disability if left untreated. TCM formulas, Danggui-Sini-decoction (DSD), Guizhi-Fuzi-decoction (GFD), and Huangqi-Guizhi-Wuwu-Decoction (HGWD), et al., have been found successful in controlling RA in clinical applications. Here, a network pharmacology-based approach was established. With this model, key gene network motif with significant (KNMS) of three formulas were predicted, and the molecular mechanism of different formula in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was inferred based on these KNMSs. The results show that the KNMSs predicted by the model kept a high consistency with the corresponding C-T network in coverage of RA pathogenic genes, coverage of functional pathways and cumulative contribution of key nodes, which confirmed the reliability and accuracy of our proposed KNMS prediction strategy. All validated KNMSs of each RA therapy-related formula were employed to decode the mechanisms of different formulas treat the same disease. Finally, the key components in KNMSs of each formula were evaluated by in vitro experiments. Our proposed KNMS prediction and validation strategy provides methodological reference for interpreting the optimization of core components group and inference of molecular mechanism of formula in the treatment of complex diseases in TCM.

Introduction

Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) is a chronic systemic autoimmune disease with symmetric inflammation of aggressive multiple joints (Sodhi et al., 2015). As the most common inflammatory rheumatic disease, the prevalence of RA is about 0.5%-1.0% in the world (Saraux et al., 2006). The inflammatory cell infiltration of synovium, pannus formation, and the progressive destruction of articular cartilage and bone destruction are the main pathological properties of RA (Brzustewicz and Bryl, 2015). The data from epidemiological investigations shows that about 90% of RA patients developed bone erosions within 2 years, eventually leading to joint deformities or even disability (Cecilia et al., 2013). Therefore, RA brings great impact on the quality of life of patients and also imposes a heavy burden on families and society.

Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has the advantages of definite curative effect, safety and few side effects in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and has attracted more and more attention in the prevention and treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. TCM usually treats RA and other complex diseases in the form of formulas, which has theoretical advantages and rich clinical experience. In the study of RA therapy-related formulas, increasing evidence confirmed that different formulas can treat RA, which coincide with the theoretical concept of “treating the same disease with different treatments” in TCM (Fu et al., 2014). Such as Danggui-Sini-decoction (DSD) (Bang et al., 2017), Guizhi-Fuzi-decoction (GFD) (Peng et al., 2013), and Huangqi-Guizhi Wuwu-Decoction (HGWD) (Wang et al., 2010) etc., have been found successful in controlling RA in TCM clinics. Previous pharmacological studies have shown that DSD exert positive effects and good anti-inflammatory function which might protect collagen-induced arthritis rats from bone and cartilage destruction (Cheng et al., 2017). It has been reported that GFD could substantially inhibit the activities of interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-α in the serum of adjuvant-induced arthritis rats, as well as inhibit the formation of synovitis and pannus, and has obvious therapeutic effect on rheumatoid arthritis (He and Gu, 2008; Xia and Song, 2011). In addition, some pharmacological experimental studies have found that HGWD could promote the apoptosis of synovial cells in rheumatoid arthritis rats with abnormal hyperfunction (Liu et al., 2017), and reduce the degree of foot swelling in adjuvant arthritis rats, affect the arthritis index of rats, and play a role in treating rheumatoid arthritis (Shi et al., 2006).

In these formulas, DSD consists of 7 herbs: Angelica sinensis (Oliv.) Diels (Danggui, 12 g), Cinnamomum cassia (L.) J. Presl (Cinnamomi ramulus, Guizhi, 9 g), Paeonia lactiflora Pall. (Baishao, 9 g), Asarum sieboldii Miq. (Xixin, 3 g), Glycyrrhiza uralensis Fisch. ex DC. (Gancao, 6 g), Tetrapanax papyrifer (Hook.) K. Koch (Medulla tetrapanacis, Tongcao, 6 g), Ziziphus jujuba Mill. (Jujubae fructus, Dazao, 8). GFD consists of 5 herbs: Cinnamomum cassia (L.) J. Presl (Cinnamomi ramulus, Guizhi, 12 g), Aconitum carmichaeli Debeaux (Aconiti lateralis radix praeparata, Fuzi, 15 g), Zingiber officinale Roscoe (Shengjiang, 9 g), Glycyrrhiza uralensis Fisch. ex DC. (Gancao, 6 g), Ziziphus jujuba Mill. (Jujubae fructus, Dazao, 12). HGWD consists of 5 herbs: Astragalus mongholicus Bunge (Huangqi, 15 g), Paeonia lactiflora Pall. (Baishao, 12 g), Cinnamomum cassia (L.) J. Presl (Cinnamomi ramulus, Gui zhi, 12 g), Zingiber officinale Roscoe (Shengjiang, 25 g), Ziziphus jujuba Mill. (Jujubae fructus, Dazao, 4). These traditional formulas are recorded in the Chinese pharmacopoeia (National Pharmacopoeia Commission, 2015). However, the molecular mechanism of these different formulas in treating rheumatoid arthritis under the concept of “treating the same disease with different treatments” is still unclear. How to develop new methods to detect the key component groups of different formulas for treating rheumatoid arthritis and speculate the possible mechanism not only provides the benefit therapy strategy for the precise treatment of RA, but also provides methodological reference for the analysis of the mechanism of treating the same disease with different treatments in TCM.

Network pharmacology has been widely used in the research of treating the same diseases with different formulas. For example, Gao et al. used network pharmacology to decode the mechanisms of Xiaoyao powder and Kaixin powder in treating depression; Liu et al. clarified the molecular mechanism of Sini San and Suanzaoren Tang in treating insomnia based on network pharmacology, etc (Yao et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2019). With the in-depth intersection of systems biology, poly-pharmacology, bioinformatics and other technologies, and the continuous improvement of the accuracy, reliability, and integrity of data resources, the research ideas and technical means of network pharmacology will be better applied to the mechanism research of formulas in TCM and provide more innovation in methodology for the molecular level research of TCM.

In this study, network pharmacology model was applied to analyze the key gene network motif with significant (KNMS) of different formulas in the treatment of RA. Coverage of RA pathogenic genes, coverage of functional pathways and cumulative contribution of key nodes were employed to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of KNMSs, and then the validated KNMSs were used to infer the common potential mechanism of different formulas in the treatment of RA. In summary, the proposed network pharmacology strategy aims to identify major mechanism and related pharmacological effects of different treatments in treating RA through specific KNMSs, which may offer a new network-based method for evaluating and selecting suitable treatment strategies of complex diseases in TCM.

Materials and Methods

Flowchart

This phenomenon that different formulas treat the same diseases is widely used in TCM clinical applications. However, there is lack of systematic method to decode the mechanisms of treat the same disease with different treatments. In this study, we designed a network pharmacology model to decode the common and specific potential mechanisms of 3 formulas in the treatment of RA, which may provide a methodological reference for different formulas treat the same disease. The workflow is illustrated in Figure 1 and described as follows: 1) the components of DSD, GFD and HGWD were collected from TCMSP, TCMID, and TCM@Taiwan; 2) ADME based methods were used to identify the main active components; 3) the main active components from three formulas and their predicted targets were used to construct the component-target (C-T) networks; 4) The KNMSs were detected from integrated C-T and target-target interaction networks; 5) the KNMSs were validated by the coverage of RA pathogenic genes, coverage of functional pathways and cumulative contribution of key nodes; 6) Finally, all validated KNMSs were employed to decode the underlying mechanism of different formulas treat the same disease.

Figure 1

Component Identification

All chemical components of Danggui-Sini-decoction (DSD), Guizhi-Fuzi-decoction (GFD), and Huangqi-Guizhi Wuwu-Decoction (HGWD) were collected from Traditional Chinese Medicine Systems Pharmacology (TCMSP) Database (Ru et al., 2014) (http://lsp.nwsuaf.edu.cn/tcmsp.php), Traditional Chinese Medicine integrated database (Xue et al., 2013) (TCMID, http://www.megabionet.org/tcmid/), and TCM@Taiwan (Chen, 2012) (http://tcm.cmu.edu.tw/zh-tw). The chemical identification and concentration of the herbs in DSD, GFD, and HGWD were collected from the previous reports. All chemical structures were prepared and converted into canonical SMILES using Open Babel Toolkit (version 2.4.1). The targets of DSD, GFD, and HGWD were predicted by using Similarity Ensemble Approach SEA (Keiser et al., 2007) (http://sea.bkslab.org/) and Swiss Target Prediction (David et al., 2014) (http://www.swisstargetprediction.ch/).

ADME Screening

Components that meet the Lipinski’ rules of five usually have better pharmacokinetic properties, higher bioavailability during metabolism in the body, and are therefore more likely to be drug candidates (Lipinski et al., 2012; Damião et al., 2014). Oral bioavailability (OB) refers to the extent and rate of active components release from the herbs into the systemic circulation and is an important indicator for evaluating the intrinsic quality of the component (Xu et al., 2012). Drug-like (DL) indicate the characteristics that an ideal drug should have and was a comprehensive reflection of the physical and chemical properties and structural characteristics exhibited by successful drugs (Tao et al., 2013). In this study, active components from DSD, GFD, and HGWD were mainly filtered by integrating Lipinski’s rules, oral bioavailability (OB), and drug-likeness (DL). The detail of Lipinski’s rules includes molecular weight lower than 500 Da, number of donor hydrogen bonds less than 5, number of acceptor hydrogen bonds less than 10, the logP lower than 5 and over -2, and meets only the criteria of 10 or fewer rotatable bonds. Besides, oral bioavailability (OB), and drug-likeness (DL) also were employed to screen the active components. The components with OB values higher than 30% and DL values higher than 0.14 were retained for further investigation (Wang et al., 2018).

Networks Construction

The component-target (C-T) networks of three formulas were constructed by using Cytoscape software (Version 3.7.0) (Lopes et al., 2010). The topological parameters of networks were analyzed using Cytoscape plugin NetworkAnalyzer (Jong et al., 2003).

Detection of Key Gene Network Motif With Significant (KNMS)

The exploration of motif structures in networks is an important issue in many domains and disciplines. To find key gene network motifs with significant (KNMS) of 3 formulas in the treatment of RA, a mathematical algorithm was designed and described as follows:

To take advantage of the motif structure of the network, m motif codebooks, and one index codebook are used to describe the random walker’s movements within and between motifs, respectively. Motif codebook i has one codeword for each node α∈i and one exit codeword. The codeword lengths are derived from the frequencies at which the random walker visits each of the nodes in the motif, pαi, and exits the motif, qi. We use pi to denote the sum of these frequencies, the total use of codewords in motif i, and Pi to denote the normalized probability distribution. Similarly, the index codebook has codewords for motif entries. The codeword lengths are derived from the set of frequencies at which the random walker enters each motif, qi. We use q to denote the sum of these frequencies, the total use of codewords to move into motifs, and Q to denote the normalized probability distribution. We want to express average length of codewords from the index codebook and the motif codebooks weighted by their rates of use. Therefore, the map equation is

Below we explain the terms of the map equation in detail and we provide examples with Huffman codes for illustration.

L(M) represents the per-step description length for motif partition M. That is, for motif partition M of n nodes into m motifs, the lower bound of the average length of the code describing a step of the random walker.

The rate at which the index codebook is used. The per-step use rate of the index codebook is given by the total probability that the random walker enters any of them motifs. This variable represents the proportion of all codes representing motif names in the codes. Where qi is probability of jumping out of Motif i.

This variable represents the average byte length required to encode motif names. The frequency-weighted average length of codewords in the index codebook. The entropy of the relative rates to use the motif codebooks measures the smallest average codeword length that is theoretically possible. The heights of individual blocks under Index codebook correspond to the relative rates and the codeword lengths approximately correspond to the negative logarithm of the rates in base 2.

This variable represents the coding proportion of all nodes (including jump-out nodes) belonging to motif i in the coding. The rate at which the motif codebook i is used, which is given by the total probability that any node in the motif is visited, plus the probability that the random walker exits the motif and the exit codeword is used.

This variable represents the average byte length required to encode all nodes in motif i. The frequency-weighted average length of codewords in motif codebook i. The entropy of the relative rates at which the random walker exits motif i and visits each node in motif i measures the smallest average codeword length that is theoretically possible. The heights of individual blocks under motif codebooks correspond to the relative rates and the codeword lengths approximately correspond to the negative logarithm of the rates in base 2.

Contribution Coefficient Calculation

The contribution coefficient (CC) represents the network contribution of KNMSs in 3 formulas. R value was used to determine the importance of the components by the following mathematical model:

where dc represents the degree of each component, which is calculated by Cytoscape. R is an indicator to evaluate the importance of the component.

Where n is the number of components from different KNMSs of DSD, GFD, and HGWD, respectively; m is the number of components from C-T network of DSD, GFD, and HGWD, respectively; Ri represents the indicator of each component in KNMSs of DSD, GFD, and HGWD, and Rj represents the indicator of each component in C-T network of DSD, GFD, and HGWD.

KEGG Pathway

To analyze the main function of the KNMSs, the pathway data were obtained from the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) database (Draghici et al., 2007) for KEGG pathway enrichment analyses. P-values were set at 0.05 as the cut-off criterion. The results of analysis were annotated by Pathview (Luo and Brouwer, 2013) in the R Bioconductor package (https://www.bioconductor.org/).

Experimental Validation

Materials

Isoliquiritigenin, isorhamnetin and quercetin (≥98% purity by HPLC) was obtained from Chengdu Pufei De Biotech Co., Ltd (Chengdu, China). Fetal bovine serum (FBS) and Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM) were purchased from Gibco (Grand Island, USA). Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich Co., Ltd (St Louis, USA).

Cell Culture and Treatment

RAW264.7 cells were obtained from the cell bank of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (Shanghai, China). The cells were cultured in DMEM with 10% FBS, and incubated at 37°C under 5% CO2. When RAW264.7 cells reached 80% confluency, the cells were treated with isoliquiritigenin, isorhamnetin and quercetin for 2 h, then the cells were treated with LPS (1 μg/ml) for 24 h.

Cell Viability Assay

MTT assay was utilized to measure cell viability. RAW264.7 cells (6×104 per/well) were seeded in 96-well plates. After 24 h incubation, RAW264.7 cells were treated with 1, 5, 10, 20, 40, and 80 μM isoliquiritigenin, isorhamnetin and quercetin for 24 h. Ten μl of MTT were added to reach a final concentration of 0.5 mg/ml, and incubated for a further 4 h. The absorbance was measured at 570 nm with a microplate reader (BioTek, USA).

Measurement of NO

Griess reagent was utilized to detected the level of NO in the culture supernatant of RAW264.7 cells. After incubation with isoliquiritigenin, isorhamnetin and quercetin for 2 h and LPS (1 μg/ml) for 24 h, the culture supernatant was collected and mixed with Griess reagent for NO assay. The absorbance was measured at 540 nm using a microplate reader.

Statistical Analysis

To compare the importance of motifs in three formulas, SPSS22.0 was used for statistical analysis. One-way analysis of variance followed by a Dunnett post-hoc test was used to compare more than two groups. Obtained p-values were corrected by Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate (FDR). Results were considered as statistically significant if the p-value was <0.05.

Results

Chemical Analysis

Chemical analysis plays important roles in the study of substances basis and mechanism of herbs in the formulas. By searching from the literature, we collected the information on specific chemical identification and concentration of the herbs in DSD, GFD and HGWD, respectively. The detail information was shown in Table 1 and Table S1. The results suggest that chemical components of herbs and the concentration of identified components provide an experiment-aided chemical space for search of active components. This will provide valuable reference for the further analysis.

Table 1

HerbMethodComponentConcentrationFormulaRef.
Angelica sinensis (Oliv.) Diels (Danggui)HPLCFerulic acid0.36 mg/gDSDXie et al., 2007
Coniferylferulate6.11 mg/g
Z-ligustilide4.34 mg/g
E-ligustilide0.23 mg/g
Z-3-butylidenephthalide0.20 mg/g
E-3-butylidenephthalide0.08 mg/g
Cinnamomum cassia (L.) J. Presl (Cinnamomi ramulus, Guizhi)UHPLCProtocatechuic acid0.11 mg/gDSD, GFD, HGWDLiang et al., 2011
Coumarin0.84 mg/g
Cinnamic alcohol0.04 mg/g
Cinnamic acid0.68 mg/g
Cinnamaldehyde9.93 mg/g
Paeonia lactiflora Pall. (Baishao)HPLCGallic acid2.33 mg/gDSD, HGWDLi et al., 2011
Hydroxyl-paeoniflorin1.89 mg/g
Catechin0.03 mg/g
Albiflorin4.44 mg/g
Paeoniflorin4.81 mg/g
Benzoic acid0.03 mg/g
1, 2, 3, 4, 6 -pentagalloylglucose4.80 mg/g
Benzoyl -paeoniflorin0.11 mg/g
Paeonol0.07 mg/g
Asarum sieboldii Miq. (Xixin)HPLCAristolochic acid A0.009 mg/gDSDGao et al., 2005
Glycyrrhiza uralensis Fisch. ex DC. (Gancao)HPLCGlycyrrhizin97.49 mg/gDSD, GFDChen et al., 2009
Liquiritin102.83 mg/g
Lsoliquritigenin98.30 mg/g
Tetrapanax papyrifer (Hook.) K.Koch (Medulla tetrapanacis, Tongcao)RP- HPLCCalceolar ioside B0.86 mg/gDSDGao et al., 2007
Ziziphus jujuba Mill. (Jujubae fructus (Dazao)HPLCRutin0.21 mg/gDSD, GFD, HGWDWang et al., 2013
Quercetin0.008 mg/g
Isorhamnetin0.17 mg/g
Aconitum carmichaeli Debeaux (Aconiti lateralis radix praeparata, Fuzi)HPLCaconitine0.28 mg/gGFDSun et al., 2009
hypaconitine0.70 mg/g
mesaconitine1.04 mg/g
benzoylaconine0.009 mg/g
benzoylhypaconine0.007 mg/g
benzoylmesaconin0.07 mg/g
Zingiber officinale Roscoe (Shengjiang)HPLC6-Gingerol16.62 mg/gGFD, HGWDZhang et al., 2009
6-Shogaol4.92 mg/g
Astragalus mongholicus Bunge (Huangqi)HPLCCampanulin0.42 mg/gHGWDLi et al., 2015
Formononetin0.02 mg/g

The information on chemical analysis of the herbs from the literature in DSD, GFD, and HGWD.

Active Components in DSD, GFD, and HGWD

By a comprehensive search of the TCMSP, TCMID, and TCM@Taiwan database, 812 components from seven herbs in DSD, 640 components from five herbs in GFD, and 459 components from five herbs in HGWD were obtained. A TCM formula usually contains large number of components, and ADME screening approaches are always used to select active components. After ADME screening, 124 active components in DSD, 120 active components in GFD, and 48 active components in HGWD were passed the combined filtering criteria which integrated by Lipinski’s rule, OB, and DL (Table 2). For further analysis of these active components, 31 common components in three formulas and 93, 89, and 17 unique components in DSD, GFD, and HGWD were found (Figure 2). These results indicate that three formulas might exert roles in treating RA by affecting the common components and specific components.

Table 2

IDComponentMWLogpHDONHACCRBNOBDLSource
DSD1(+)-catechin290.291.0256154.830.24Baishao
DSD2(3S,5R,8R,9R,10S,14S)-3,17-dihydroxy-4,4,8,10,14-pentamethyl-2,3,5,6,7,9-hexahydro-1H-cyclopenta [a]phenanthrene-15,16-dione358.523.5224043.560.53Baishao
DSD311alpha,12alpha-epoxy-3beta-23-dihydroxy-30-norolean-20-en-28,12beta-olide470.713.8225164.770.38Baishao
DSD4albiflorin_qt318.350.5326466.640.33Baishao
DSD5kaempferol286.251.2346141.880.24Baishao
DSD6Lactiflorin462.490.31310549.120.8Baishao
DSD7paeoniflorgenone318.350.8616487.590.37Baishao
DSD8paeoniflorin_qt318.350.6926468.180.4Baishao
DSD9(-)-catechin290.291.0256149.680.24Dazao
DSD10(S)-Coclaurine285.372.234342.350.24Dazao
DSD1121302-79-4486.764.5335373.520.77Dazao
DSD12berberine336.393.7504236.860.78Dazao
DSD13coumestrol268.232.4325032.490.34Dazao
DSD14Fumarine353.41.9506059.260.83Dazao
DSD15Jujubasaponin V_qt472.784.6124236.990.63Dazao
DSD16jujuboside A_qt472.783.824136.670.62Dazao
DSD17Jujuboside C_qt472.783.824140.260.62Dazao
DSD18malkangunin432.562.7227657.710.63Dazao
DSD19Mauritine D342.461.1126289.130.45Dazao
DSD20Moupinamide313.382.4635686.710.26Dazao
DSD21Nuciferin295.413.3803234.430.4Dazao
DSD22quercetin302.251.0757146.430.28Dazao
DSD23Ruvoside_qt390.571.4235236.120.76Dazao
DSD24Spiradine A311.461.29130113.520.61Dazao
DSD25stepharine297.381.7614231.550.33Dazao
DSD26Stepholidine327.412.2625233.110.54Dazao
DSD27Ziziphin_qt472.783.824166.950.62Dazao
DSD28zizyphus saponin I_qt472.783.824132.690.62Dazao
DSD292,6-di(phenyl)thiopyran-4-thione280.434.3900269.130.15Danggui
DSD30(-)-Medicocarpin432.461.2649440.990.95Gancao
DSD31(2R)-7-hydroxy-2-(4-hydroxyphenyl)chroman-4-one256.272.7924171.120.18Gancao
DSD32(2S)-6-(2,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-2-(2-hydroxypropan-2-yl)-4-methoxy-2,3-dihydrofuro[3,2-g]chromen-7-one384.412.6137360.250.63Gancao
DSD33(2S)-7-hydroxy-2-(4-hydroxyphenyl)-8-(3-methylbut-2-enyl)chroman-4-one324.43.6224336.570.32Gancao
DSD34(E)-1-(2,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-3-(2,2-dimethylchromen-6-yl)prop-2-en-1-one322.384.4624339.620.35Gancao
DSD35(E)-3-[3,4-dihydroxy-5-(3-methylbut-2-enyl)phenyl]-1-(2,4-dihydroxyphenyl)prop-2-en-1-one340.43.4745546.270.31Gancao
DSD361,3-dihydroxy-8,9-dimethoxy-6-benzofurano[3,2-c]chromenone328.292.7427262.90.53Gancao
DSD371,3-dihydroxy-9-methoxy-6-benzofurano[3,2-c]chromenone298.262.4826148.140.43Gancao
DSD3818α-hydroxyglycyrrhetic acid486.764.5435141.160.71Gancao
DSD391-Methoxyphaseollidin354.433.6625369.980.64Gancao
DSD402-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-5,7-dihydroxy-6-(3-methylbut-2-enyl)chromone354.382.9946344.150.41Gancao
DSD412-[(3R)-8,8-dimethyl-3,4-dihydro-2H-pyrano[6,5-f]chromen-3-yl]-5-methoxyphenol338.434.3514236.210.52Gancao
DSD423-(2,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-8-(1,1-dimethylprop-2-enyl)-7-hydroxy-5-methoxy-coumarin368.413.9236459.620.43Gancao
DSD433-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-5,7-dihydroxy-8-(3-methylbut-2-enyl)chromone354.383.0246366.370.41Gancao
DSD443’-Hydroxy-4’-O-Methylglabridin354.433.7625243.710.57Gancao
DSD453’-Methoxyglabridin354.433.7625246.160.57Gancao
DSD465,7-dihydroxy-3-(4-methoxyphenyl)-8-(3-methylbut-2-enyl)chromone352.413.2925430.490.41Gancao
DSD476-prenylated eriodictyol356.42.9946339.220.41Gancao
DSD487,2’,4’-trihydroxy-5-methoxy-3-arylcoumarin300.282.5136283.710.27Gancao
DSD497-Acetoxy-2-methylisoflavone294.323.4104338.920.26Gancao
DSD507-Methoxy-2-methyl isoflavone266.313.4803242.560.2Gancao
DSD518-(6-hydroxy-2-benzofuranyl)-2,2-dimethyl-5-chromenol308.354.2724158.440.38Gancao
DSD528-prenylated eriodictyol356.42.9946353.790.4Gancao
DSD53Calycosin284.282.8225247.750.24Gancao
DSD54dehydroglyasperins C340.43.1145353.820.37Gancao
DSD55DFV256.272.7924132.760.18Gancao
DSD56echinatin270.33.4124466.580.17Gancao
DSD57Eurycarpin A338.383.2935343.280.37Gancao
DSD58formononetin268.283.0114269.670.21Gancao
DSD59Gancaonin A352.413.3425451.080.4Gancao
DSD60Gancaonin B368.413.1436448.790.45Gancao
DSD61Gancaonin G352.413.2525460.440.39Gancao
DSD62Gancaonin H420.493.9936350.10.78Gancao
DSD63Glabranin324.43.5924352.90.31Gancao
DSD64Glabrene322.383.6824146.270.44Gancao
DSD65Glabridin324.43.8124153.250.47Gancao
DSD66Glabrone336.363.7825152.510.5Gancao
DSD67Glepidotin A338.382.8835344.720.35Gancao
DSD68Glepidotin B340.42.8835364.460.34Gancao
DSD69glyasperin B370.433.1436465.220.44Gancao
DSD70Glyasperin C356.453.5335445.560.4Gancao
DSD71glyasperin F354.383.5236175.840.54Gancao
DSD72Glyasperins M368.413.5726272.670.59Gancao
DSD73Glycyrin382.443.7826552.610.47Gancao
DSD74Glycyrol366.394.0626390.780.67Gancao
DSD75Glycyrrhiza flavonol A370.382.1847141.280.6Gancao
DSD76Glypallichalcone284.333.814561.60.19Gancao
DSD77Glyzaglabrin298.262.3226161.070.35Gancao
DSD78HMO268.282.9214238.370.21Gancao
DSD79Inermine284.282.1915075.180.54Gancao
DSD80Inflacoumarin A322.384.3624339.710.33Gancao
DSD81Isoglycyrol366.394.1516144.70.84Gancao
DSD82Isolicoflavonol354.382.9246345.170.42Gancao
DSD83isoliquiritigenin256.273.0434385.320.15Gancao
DSD84isorhamnetin316.281.3147249.60.31Gancao
DSD85Isotrifoliol298.262.5426131.940.42Gancao
DSD86Jaranol314.312.826350.830.29Gancao
DSD87kanzonols W336.363.9725150.480.52Gancao
DSD88Licoagrocarpin338.433.9414358.810.58Gancao
DSD89Licoagroisoflavone336.362.9525257.280.49Gancao
DSD90licochalcone a338.434.7424640.790.29Gancao
DSD91Licochalcone B286.33.1735476.760.19Gancao
DSD92licochalcone G354.434.2135649.250.32Gancao
DSD93Licocoumarone340.44.135433.210.36Gancao
DSD94licoisoflavanone354.383.5436152.470.54Gancao
DSD95Licoisoflavone354.382.9946341.610.42Gancao
DSD96Licoisoflavone B352.363.5436138.930.55Gancao
DSD97licopyranocoumarin384.412.4737380.360.65Gancao
DSD98Licoricone382.443.0826563.580.47Gancao
DSD99liquiritin418.430.4359465.690.74Gancao
DSD100Lupiwighteone338.383.2335351.640.37Gancao
DSD101Medicarpin270.33.0714149.220.34Gancao
DSD102naringenin272.272.4735159.290.21Gancao
DSD103Odoratin314.312.8126349.950.3Gancao
DSD104Phaseol336.364.5925278.770.58Gancao
DSD105Phaseolinisoflavan324.43.7724132.010.45Gancao
DSD106Pinocembrin256.272.8524164.720.18Gancao
DSD107Quercetin der.330.312.5537346.450.33Gancao
DSD108Semilicoisoflavone B352.363.5536148.780.55Gancao
DSD109shinpterocarpin322.384.1314080.30.73Gancao
DSD110Sigmoidin-B356.43.0246334.880.41Gancao
DSD111Vestitol272.322.8924274.660.21Gancao
DSD112ent-Epicatechin290.292.8356148.960.24Guizhi
DSD113beta-sitosterol414.793.211636.910.75Guizhi
DSD114sitosterol414.792.7111636.910.75Guizhi
DSD115(-)-taxifolin304.271.6657160.510.27Guizhi
DSD116DMEP282.321.93061055.660.15Guizhi
DSD117paryriogenin A466.724.6214141.410.76Tongcao
DSD118(3S)-7-hydroxy-3-(2,3,4-trimethoxyphenyl)chroman-4-one330.361.5916448.230.33Xixin
DSD119[(1S)-3-[(E)-but-2-enyl]-2-methyl-4-oxo-1-cyclopent-2-enyl] (1R,3R)-3-[(E)-3-methoxy-2-methyl-3-oxoprop-1-enyl]-2,2-dimethylcyclopropane-1-carboxylate360.494.1805862.520.31Xixin
DSD1204,9-dimethoxy-1-vinyl-$b-carboline254.312.9603365.30.19Xixin
DSD121Caribine326.430.5325037.060.83Xixin
DSD122Cryptopin369.452.3806278.740.72Xixin
DSD123sesamin354.382.2506256.550.83Xixin
DSD124ZINC05223929354.382.2506231.570.83Xixin
GFD1(-)-catechin290.291.0256149.680.24Dazao
GFD2(+)-catechin290.291.0256154.830.24Dazao
GFD3(S)-Coclaurine285.372.234342.350.24Dazao
GFD421302-79-4486.764.5335373.520.77Dazao
GFD5berberine336.393.7504236.860.78Dazao
GFD6coumestrol268.232.4325032.490.34Dazao
GFD7Fumarine353.41.9506059.260.83Dazao
GFD8Jujubasaponin V_qt472.784.6124236.990.63Dazao
GFD9jujuboside A_qt472.783.824136.670.62Dazao
GFD10Jujuboside C_qt472.783.824140.260.62Dazao
GFD11malkangunin432.562.7227657.710.63Dazao
GFD12Mauritine D342.461.1126289.130.45Dazao
GFD13Moupinamide313.382.4635686.710.26Dazao
GFD14Nuciferin295.413.3803234.430.4Dazao
GFD15quercetin302.251.0757146.430.28Dazao
GFD16Ruvoside_qt390.571.4235236.120.76Dazao
GFD17Spiradine A311.461.29130113.520.61Dazao
GFD18stepharine297.381.7614231.550.33Dazao
GFD19Stepholidine327.412.2625233.110.54Dazao
GFD20Ziziphin_qt472.783.824166.950.62Dazao
GFD21zizyphus saponin I_qt472.783.824132.690.62Dazao
GFD22(-)-Medicocarpin432.461.2649440.990.95Gancao
GFD23(2R)-7-hydroxy-2-(4-hydroxyphenyl)chroman-4-one256.272.7924171.120.18Gancao
GFD24(2S)-6-(2,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-2-(2-hydroxypropan-2-yl)-4-methoxy-2,3-dihydrofuro[3,2-g]chromen-7-one384.412.6137360.250.63Gancao
GFD25(2S)-7-hydroxy-2-(4-hydroxyphenyl)-8-(3-methylbut-2-enyl)chroman-4-one324.43.6224336.570.32Gancao
GFD26(E)-1-(2,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-3-(2,2-dimethylchromen-6-yl)prop-2-en-1-one322.384.4624339.620.35Gancao
GFD27(E)-3-[3,4-dihydroxy-5-(3-methylbut-2-enyl)phenyl]-1-(2,4-dihydroxyphenyl)prop-2-en-1-one340.43.4745546.270.31Gancao
GFD281,3-dihydroxy-8,9-dimethoxy-6-benzofurano[3,2-c]chromenone328.292.7427262.90.53Gancao
GFD291,3-dihydroxy-9-methoxy-6-benzofurano[3,2-c]chromenone298.262.4826148.140.43Gancao
GFD3018α-hydroxyglycyrrhetic acid486.764.5435141.160.71Gancao
GFD311-Methoxyphaseollidin354.433.6625369.980.64Gancao
GFD322-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-5,7-dihydroxy-6-(3-methylbut-2-enyl)chromone354.382.9946344.150.41Gancao
GFD332-[(3R)-8,8-dimethyl-3,4-dihydro-2H-pyrano[6,5-f]chromen-3-yl]-5-methoxyphenol338.434.3514236.210.52Gancao
GFD343-(2,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-8-(1,1-dimethylprop-2-enyl)-7-hydroxy-5-methoxy-coumarin368.413.9236459.620.43Gancao
GFD353-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-5,7-dihydroxy-8-(3-methylbut-2-enyl)chromone354.383.0246366.370.41Gancao
GFD363’-Hydroxy-4’-O-Methylglabridin354.433.7625243.710.57Gancao
GFD373’-Methoxyglabridin354.433.7625246.160.57Gancao
GFD385,7-dihydroxy-3-(4-methoxyphenyl)-8-(3-methylbut-2-enyl)chromone352.413.2925430.490.41Gancao
GFD396-prenylated eriodictyol356.42.9946339.220.41Gancao
GFD407,2’,4’-trihydroxy-5-methoxy-3-arylcoumarin300.282.5136283.710.27Gancao
GFD417-Acetoxy-2-methylisoflavone294.323.4104338.920.26Gancao
GFD427-Methoxy-2-methyl isoflavone266.313.4803242.560.2Gancao
GFD438-(6-hydroxy-2-benzofuranyl)-2,2-dimethyl-5-chromenol308.354.2724158.440.38Gancao
GFD448-prenylated eriodictyol356.42.9946353.790.4Gancao
GFD45Calycosin284.282.8225247.750.24Gancao
GFD46dehydroglyasperins C340.43.1145353.820.37Gancao
GFD47DFV256.272.7924132.760.18Gancao
GFD48echinatin270.33.4124466.580.17Gancao
GFD49Eurycarpin A338.383.2935343.280.37Gancao
GFD50formononetin268.283.0114269.670.21Gancao
GFD51Gancaonin A352.413.3425451.080.4Gancao
GFD52Gancaonin B368.413.1436448.790.45Gancao
GFD53Gancaonin G352.413.2525460.440.39Gancao
GFD54Gancaonin H420.493.9936350.10.78Gancao
GFD55Glabranin324.43.5924352.90.31Gancao
GFD56Glabrene322.383.6824146.270.44Gancao
GFD57Glabridin324.43.8124153.250.47Gancao
GFD58Glabrone336.363.7825152.510.5Gancao
GFD59Glepidotin A338.382.8835344.720.35Gancao
GFD60Glepidotin B340.42.8835364.460.34Gancao
GFD61glyasperin B370.433.1436465.220.44Gancao
GFD62Glyasperin C356.453.5335445.560.4Gancao
GFD63glyasperin F354.383.5236175.840.54Gancao
GFD64Glyasperins M368.413.5726272.670.59Gancao
GFD65Glycyrin382.443.7826552.610.47Gancao
GFD66Glycyrol366.394.0626390.780.67Gancao
GFD67Glycyrrhiza flavonol A370.382.1847141.280.6Gancao
GFD68Glypallichalcone284.333.814561.60.19Gancao
GFD69Glyzaglabrin298.262.3226161.070.35Gancao
GFD70HMO268.282.9214238.370.21Gancao
GFD71Inermine284.282.1915075.180.54Gancao
GFD72Inflacoumarin A322.384.3624339.710.33Gancao
GFD73Isoglycyrol366.394.1516144.70.84Gancao
GFD74Isolicoflavonol354.382.9246345.170.42Gancao
GFD75isoliquiritigenin256.273.0434385.320.15Gancao
GFD76isorhamnetin316.281.3147249.60.31Gancao
GFD77Isotrifoliol298.262.5426131.940.42Gancao
GFD78Jaranol314.312.826350.830.29Gancao
GFD79kaempferol286.251.2346141.880.24Gancao
GFD80kanzonols W336.363.9725150.480.52Gancao
GFD81Licoagrocarpin338.433.9414358.810.58Gancao
GFD82Licoagroisoflavone336.362.9525257.280.49Gancao
GFD83licochalcone a338.434.7424640.790.29Gancao
GFD84Licochalcone B286.33.1735476.760.19Gancao
GFD85licochalcone G354.434.2135649.250.32Gancao
GFD86Licocoumarone340.44.135433.210.36Gancao
GFD87licoisoflavanone354.383.5436152.470.54Gancao
GFD88Licoisoflavone354.382.9946341.610.42Gancao
GFD89Licoisoflavone B352.363.5436138.930.55Gancao
GFD90licopyranocoumarin384.412.4737380.360.65Gancao
GFD91Licoricone382.443.0826563.580.47Gancao
GFD92liquiritin418.430.4359465.690.74Gancao
GFD93Lupiwighteone338.383.2335351.640.37Gancao
GFD94Medicarpin270.33.0714149.220.34Gancao
GFD95naringenin272.272.4735159.290.21Gancao
GFD96Odoratin314.312.8126349.950.3Gancao
GFD97Phaseol336.364.5925278.770.58Gancao
GFD98Phaseolinisoflavan324.43.7724132.010.45Gancao
GFD99Pinocembrin256.272.8524164.720.18Gancao
GFD100Quercetin der.330.312.5537346.450.33Gancao
GFD101Semilicoisoflavone B352.363.5536148.780.55Gancao
GFD102shinpterocarpin322.384.1314080.30.73Gancao
GFD103Sigmoidin-B356.43.0246334.880.41Gancao
GFD104Vestitol272.322.8924274.660.21Gancao
GFD105ent-Epicatechin290.292.8356148.960.24Guizhi
GFD106beta-sitosterol414.793.211636.910.75Guizhi
GFD107sitosterol414.792.7111636.910.75Guizhi
GFD108(-)-taxifolin304.271.6657160.510.27Guizhi
GFD109DMEP282.321.93061055.660.15Guizhi
GFD1106-gingerol294.433.45241035.640.16Shengjiang
GFD1116-shogaol276.414.95139310.14Shengjiang
GFD112(R)-Norcoclaurine271.341.7344282.540.21Fuzi
GFD1136-Demethyldesoline453.64-0.5348551.870.66Fuzi
GFD114benzoylnapelline463.672.925434.060.53Fuzi
GFD115Deltoin328.392.9505446.690.37Fuzi
GFD116Deoxyandrographolide334.52.7124456.30.31Fuzi
GFD117ignavine449.590.7236384.080.25Fuzi
GFD118isotalatizidine407.610.4136450.820.73Fuzi
GFD119karakoline377.580.835251.730.73Fuzi
GFD120Karanjin292.33.4204269.560.34Fuzi
HGWD1(+)-catechin290.291.0256154.830.24Baishao
HGWD2(3S,5R,8R,9R,10S,14S)-3,17-dihydroxy-4,4,8,10,14-pentamethyl-2,3,5,6,7,9-hexahydro-1H-cyclopenta[a]phenanthrene-15,16-dione358.523.5224043.560.53Baishao
HGWD311alpha,12alpha-epoxy-3beta-23-dihydroxy-30-norolean-20-en-28,12beta-olide470.713.8225164.770.38Baishao
HGWD4albiflorin_qt318.350.5326466.640.33Baishao
HGWD5kaempferol286.251.2346141.880.24Baishao
HGWD6Lactiflorin462.490.31310549.120.8Baishao
HGWD7paeoniflorgenone318.350.8616487.590.37Baishao
HGWD8paeoniflorin_qt318.350.6926468.180.4Baishao
HGWD9(-)-catechin290.291.0256149.680.24Dazao
HGWD10(S)-Coclaurine285.372.234342.350.24Dazao
HGWD1121302-79-4486.764.5335373.520.77Dazao
HGWD12berberine336.393.7504236.860.78Dazao
HGWD13coumestrol268.232.4325032.490.34Dazao
HGWD14Fumarine353.41.9506059.260.83Dazao
HGWD15Jujubasaponin V_qt472.784.6124236.990.63Dazao
HGWD16jujuboside A_qt472.783.824136.670.62Dazao
HGWD17Jujuboside C_qt472.783.824140.260.62Dazao
HGWD18malkangunin432.562.7227657.710.63Dazao
HGWD19Mauritine D342.461.1126289.130.45Dazao
HGWD20Moupinamide313.382.4635686.710.26Dazao
HGWD21Nuciferin295.413.3803234.430.4Dazao
HGWD22quercetin302.251.0757146.430.28Dazao
HGWD23Ruvoside_qt390.571.4235236.120.76Dazao
HGWD24Spiradine A311.461.29130113.520.61Dazao
HGWD25stepharine297.381.7614231.550.33Dazao
HGWD26Stepholidine327.412.2625233.110.54Dazao
HGWD27Ziziphin_qt472.783.824166.950.62Dazao
HGWD28zizyphus saponin I_qt472.783.824132.690.62Dazao
HGWD29ent-Epicatechin290.292.8356148.960.24Guizhi
HGWD30beta-sitosterol414.793.211636.910.75Guizhi
HGWD31sitosterol414.792.7111636.910.75Guizhi
HGWD32(-)-taxifolin304.271.6657160.510.27Guizhi
HGWD33DMEP282.321.93061055.660.15Guizhi
HGWD346-gingerol294.433.45241035.640.16Shengjiang
HGWD356-shogaol276.414.95139310.14Shengjiang
HGWD36(6aR,11aR)-9,10-dimethoxy-6a,11a-dihydro-6H-benzofurano[3,2-c]chromen-3-ol300.332.8815264.260.42Huangqi
HGWD371,7-Dihydroxy-3,9-dimethoxy pterocarpene314.312.8526239.050.48Huangqi
HGWD383,9-di-O-methylnissolin314.363.2805353.740.48Huangqi
HGWD397-O-methylisomucronulatol316.382.8515474.690.3Huangqi
HGWD40Bifendate418.381.75010731.10.67Huangqi
HGWD41Calycosin284.282.8225247.750.24Huangqi
HGWD42formononetin268.283.0114269.670.21Huangqi
HGWD43isoflavanone316.332.76263109.990.3Huangqi
HGWD44isorhamnetin316.281.3147249.60.31Huangqi
HGWD45Jaranol314.312.826350.830.29Huangqi
HGWD469,10-dimethoxypterocarpan-3-O-β-D-glucoside462.491.18410536.740.92Huangqi
HGWD47(Z)-1-(2,4-dihydroxyphenyl)-3-(4-hydroxyphenyl)prop-2-en-1-one256.273.0434387.510.15Huangqi
HGWD48(3R)-3-(2-hydroxy-3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)chroman-7-ol302.352.7625367.670.26Huangqi

Components in DSD, GFD, and HGWD for further analysis after ADME screening.

Figure 2

C-T Network Construction

To facilitate analysis of the complex relationships between active components and their targets of three formulas, component-target networks were constructed by using Cytoscape (Figures S1–S3). The results revealed that the DSD network consisted of 124 active components, 846 target proteins, and 3758 interactions; the GFD network contained120 active components, 821 target proteins, and 3759 interactions; the HGWD network consisted of 48 active components, 612 target proteins, and 1373 interactions.

We further analyzed the topology parameters of these C-T networks using NetworkAnalyzer and found that the average degree of components and targets in DSD were 30.31 and 5.20; the average degree of components and targets in GFD were 31.33 and 5.36; the average degree of components and targets in HGWD were 28.6 and 2.43. These results indicate that there exist interactions between one component and multiple targets in three formulas, and also exist phenomenon that different components act on the same target, which is in line with the characteristics of multi-component and multi-target mediated synergistic effect of TCM, and also reflects the complexity of the mechanism of TCM.

KNMSs Predication and Validation

KNMSs Predication

These C-T networks are complex and huge. How to quickly extract important information from these complex networks is the key step to decode underlying molecular mechanism. Here, we introduced the infomap algorithm in the network pharmacology model for the first time based on the random walk theory combined with Huffman-encoding. The algorithm performs to optimize the discovery of KNMSs in C-T network heuristically by using a reasonable global metric. 7, 10, and 10 KNMSs were predicted in DSD, GFD, and HGWD, respectively (p value < 0.05) (Figures 35). The detail information of network KNMSs were shown in Table S2.

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

KNMSs Validation

In order to validate whether predicted KNMSs in each formula can represent corresponding full C-T networks in treating RA. Three strategies were used to verify the accuracy and reliability and of KNMSs. The first strategy was used to see whether the number of RA pathogenic genes in KNMSs are close to the number of RA pathogenic genes in CT network. The coverage was defined as the percentage of the number of pathogenic genes in KNMSs to the number of pathogenic genes in C-T network. High coverage indicated that KNMSs could retain most formula-targeted RA pathogenic genes that included in the corresponding C-T network. The second strategy was designed to see whether the gene enrichment pathways in KNMSs covers the gene enrichment pathways in C-T network as much as possible. High coverage indicated that KNMSs could cover most genes enriched pathways of the corresponding C-T network. The third strategy was employed to calculate the percentage of cumulative contribution of important nodes in KNMSs to that of nodes in C-T network. High percentage means KNMSs can retain the important nodes in the corresponding C-T network. The detail results are as follows:

Validated the Number and Coverage of Pathogenic Genes in KNMSs

To assess whether the number of RA pathogenic genes in KNMSs are close to the number of RA pathogenic genes in corresponding C-T network. The known pathogenic genes of RA reported by published literature and databases were collected, and the pathogenic genes confirmed by more than 5 literatures were selected for further analysis (Table S3). We found that the C-T network of DSD, GFD, and HGWD contains 50, 52, and 39 pathogenic genes, respectively. While the KNMSs of DSD, GFD, and HGWD contains 39, 40, and 30 pathogenic genes. The number of pathogenic genes in KNMSs compared to that in C-T network of DSD, GFD, and HGWD reached 78%, 76.9%, and 76.9%, which confirmed that the predicted KNMSs with high coverage of pathogenic genes (Figures 6A–C). These results demonstrate that KNMSs have a high coincidence degree with C-T network in the number and coverage of pathogenic genes, it also indicated that our proposed KNMS detection model can maximize the coincidence degree of pathogenic genes in the C-T network of formulas.

Figure 6

Validated the Genes Enriched Pathways in KNMSs

An additional metric for evaluating the importance of the inferred motifs is determined by their functional coherence, which can be accessed via their related genes enrichment pathways from KEGG (Kanehisa and Goto, 2000). Here, we used this method to detect whether KNMSs found in each formula can represent their full C-T networks at functional level. Our analysis shown that genes enriched pathways of KNMSs in DSD accounts for 85.8% of genes enriched pathways of the full C-T network in DSD; genes enriched pathways of KNMSs in GFD accounts for 86.6% genes enriched pathways of the full C-T network in GFD; genes enriched pathways of KNMSs in HGWD accounts for 81.9% genes enriched pathways of the full C-T network in HGWD (Figures 7A, B). It was encouraged that the gene enriched pathways involved in KNMSs of 3 formulas are highly compatible with gene enriched pathways of their C-T networks. This result confirmed that KNMSs have a high coincidence degree with C-T network at the gene functional level and also suggested that our proposed KNMS detection model can maximize the retention of functional pathways in the formulas of TCM.

Figure 7

Validated the Cumulative Contribution of Important Nodes in KNMSs

The degree of nodes is a key topological parameter that characterizes the influence of nodes in a network (Lv et al., 2014). Here, a mathematical model was established to evaluate the importance of KNMSs in each formula based on the degree of nodes. According to the calculation results, each KNMS was assigned a CC value. The detailed information was shown in Figure 8 and Table S4. The sum of CC of 7, 10, and 10 KNMSs in each formula reached 80.44%, 79.88%, and 70.76% of that in C-T networks of DSD, GFD, and HGWD, respectively. The results confirmed that KNMSs have a high coincidence degree with C-T network on the topological structure and also indicated that our proposed KNMS detection model could maximize the coverage of important network topological structures compared with C-T network in each formula.

Figure 8

Potential Mechanisms Analysis of Different Formulas Treats the Same Disease

In order to reveal the potential mechanism of KNMSs in different formula for treating rheumatoid arthritis, pathway enrichment analysis of KNMS-related genes in each formula were performed. In the DSD, genes in total 7 KNMSs were enriched in 165 pathways, genes in two KNMSs, DSD1, and DSD2 were enriched in 158 pathways, accounting for 95.8% of that in 7 KNMSs. The arthritis-related signaling pathways corresponding to DSD1 and DSD2 were partially complementary, for example, genes in DSD1 were mainly enriched in JAK-STAT signaling pathway and AMPK signaling pathway, genes in DSD2 mainly enriched in NF-kappa B signaling pathway, p53 signaling pathway and Wnt signaling pathway. In GFD, we total got 10 KNMSs. Genes in these 10 KNMSs were enriched in 151 pathways. Four of 10 KNMSs, GFD1, GFD3, GFD4, and GFD5 related genes are enriched in 144 pathways, accounting for 95.4% of enrichment pathways in 10 KNMSs of GFD. Moreover, some of their corresponding arthritis-related signaling pathways are complementary. For example, GFD1 mainly includes TNF signaling pathway, IL-17 signaling pathway and AMPK signaling pathway, and GFD3 mainly includes Inflammatory mediator regulation of TRP channels and GnRH signaling pathway. In HGWD, genes in 10 predicted KNMSs were enriched in 110 pathways, genes in HGWD4 and HGWD5, HGWD6, and HGWD8 covered 102 pathways, accounting for 92.7% of all KNMSs gene enrichment pathways. Consistent with DSD and GFD results, some of their corresponding arthritis-related signal pathways were also complementary. For example, HGWD4 mainly includes TNF signaling pathway, Hedgehog signaling pathway and IL-17 signaling pathway, HGWD5 mainly includes VEGF signaling pathway, NF-kappa B signaling pathway and mTOR signaling pathway, HGWD6 mainly includes cAMP signaling pathway and cGMP-PKG signaling pathway (Figure 9, Table S5). These results show that KNMSs in different formulas have distinct roles and synergistic effects in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

Figure 9

In order to further explore the potential mechanism of the three formulas in treating RA, besides the difference analysis of each KNMS in different formulas, KEGG enrichment analysis of all KNMSs in each formula were also implemented and found that 3 formulas play the therapeutic effect on RA through the following five common pathways: Rap1 signaling pathway, cAMP signaling pathway, MAPK signaling pathway, EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Resistance, Calcium signaling pathway and Neuroactive ligand-receptor interaction. Except the common pathways, we found that the three formulas can play the role of treating RA through their specific pathways (Figure 10). For example, DSD can play the role of treating RA by regulating VEGF signaling pathway. GFD can play a role in treating RA by regulating HIF-1 signaling pathway. HGWD can play a role in treating RA by regulating PI3K-Akt signaling pathway. These results indicate that 3 formulas can play the role of treating RA through different and common pathways, which may act as the essence of different formulas treat the same disease.

Figure 10

Through PubMed literature search, we found that among the common pathways, MAPK signaling pathway and cAMP signaling pathway have the most correlation records with rheumatoid arthritis. We selected MAPK signaling pathway and cAMP signaling pathway which were reported closely related to inflammation to illustrate the mechanism of different formulas treat the same disease in detail. Firstly, a comprehensive inflammatory pathway was constructed by integrating the two pathways. And then, the genes in KNMSs of three formulas were mapped to the comprehensive inflammatory pathway (Figure 11). Results show that genes in the KNMSs of DSD mainly distributed in the downstream of the comprehensive inflammatory pathway, such as MAPK14, MAPK8, and JUND; Genes in the KNMSs of GFD mainly distributed in the downstream of the comprehensive inflammatory pathway, such as AKT3, RAF1, and TAOK3; while genes in the KNMSs of HGWD distributed both in the upstream and downstream of the comprehensive inflammatory pathway, such as CSF1R, ADCYAP1R1, CHRM1, NFKB1, MAPT, and JUN. The results suggest that different formulas play therapeutic roles through targeting different genes in the comprehensive inflammatory pathway.

Figure 11

Experimental Validation In Vitro

Effects of isoliquiritigenin, isorhamnetin and quercetin with different concentrations on cell viabilities of RAW264.7 cells were detected by MTT assay. Compared with control group, 1, 5, 10, and 20 μM isoliquiritigenin, isorhamnetin, and quercetin had no effects on RAW264.7 cells viabilities (Figures 12A–C). Therefore, four concentrations were used (1, 5, 10, and 20 μM) for subsequent experiments.

Figure 12

NO is a regulator of information transmission between cells and has the function of mediating cellular immune and inflammatory reactions. In order to further evaluate the results obtained by the network pharmacology model, the key components in KNMSs of each formula were selected for experimental validation. Isoliquiritigenin from motif 1 (DSD1) of DSD, isorhamnetin from motif 1 (GFD1) of GFD, and quercetin from motif 5 (HGWD5) of HGWD were chose to detect potential anti-inflammatory effects using LPS induced RAW264.7 cells. Compared with control group, the NO level was significantly increased by 275.34% in the culture medium of LPS treated cells, however, isoliquiritigenin (10 and 20 μM) markedly decreased the extracellular NO levels by 107.94% and 151.04%, isorhamnetin (10 and 20 μM) markedly decreased the extracellular NO levels by 81.59% and 137.94%, quercetin (5, 10 and 20 μM) markedly decreased the extracellular NO levels by 56.68%, 106.57% and 174.59%, respectively, in a concentration-dependent manner (Figures 12D–F). Our results demonstrated that isoliquiritigenin, isorhamnetin, and quercetin inhibited NO production in LPS induced RAW264.7 cells.

Discussion

The therapeutic effect of current synthetic agents in treating RA is not satisfactory and most of them have undesirable side effects. In China, some classical formulas have a long history of clinical application to treat RA and have shown significant curative effects. However, TCM formulas is a multi-component and multi-target agent from the molecular perspective (Corson and Crews, 2007; Bo et al., 2013). Based on the characteristics of complex components and unclear targets of TCM formula, the development of novel methods became an urgent issue needed to be solved.

TCM network pharmacology emerging recently has become a flourishing field in TCM modern studies along with the rapid progress of bioinformatics (Guo et al., 2017; Gao et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2018). So, using the method, combined with the rich experience of TCM treatment, could hopefully decode the underlying mechanism of TCM formula in the treatment of complex disease with the characteristic of “multi-targets, multi-component”. Network pharmacology approach could help us search for putative active components and targets of herbs based on widely existing databases and shows the network of drug-targets by a visual way (Gao et al., 2016). Moreover, it abstracts the interaction between drugs and target genes into a network model and investigates the effects of drugs on biological networks from a holistic perspective. It can help us to further understand potential action mechanisms of TCM within the context of interactions at the system level. However, in the decode process of complex networks, there are still exist redundancies and noises in current network pharmacology study.

In order to solve this problem, we introduced the infomap algorithm based on huffman encoding and the random walk theory for the first time. The algorithm performs to optimize the discovery of motif in C-T network heuristically by using a reasonable global metric. The results of optimized KNMSs are used to analyze the mechanism of different formulas for the treatment of RA. During this process the contribution coefficient model was used to validate the predicted KNMSs, which confirm the accuracy and reliability of our proposed strategy.

In this study, 230 active components of three formulas were found in total after ADME screening, 31 of these components are common to the three formulas, and 93, 89, and 17 components are specific to each formula. It suggested that the three formulas play therapeutic effect on rheumatoid arthritis through both common and specific components. In order to analyze the key component groups and mechanisms of the three formulas in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, we used target prediction tools to predict the targets of active components in different formulas and construct C-T networks. The degree distribution in the C-T network shows that the same components could act on different targets, and different components could also act on the same targets, which fully reflects the multi-component and multi-target complexity of TCM in treating complex diseases.

In order to quickly extract important information from complex C-T networks, motif prediction and validation strategy were used to rapidly discover the KNMSs of different formulas in the treatment of RA by using multidimensional data. More and more evidences show that network motif is an effective method to extract functional units and find core elements in complex networks. Radicchi et al. has confirmed that network motif offers an effective and manageable approach for characterizing rapidly the main functional unit of disease progression (Radicchi et al., 2004). Yang has reported that identifying overlapping motifs is crucial for understanding the structure as well as the function of real-world networks (Yang and Leskovec, 2012). Cai et al. indicate that uncovering motif structures of a complex network can help us to understand how the network play functions (Cai et al., 2014). Utilizing the network motif prediction model, 7, 10, and 10 KNMSs (p<0.05) were predicted in DSD, GFD and HGWD, respectively.

Coverage of RA pathogenic genes, coverage of functional pathways and cumulative contribution of key nodes were employed to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of KNMSs. The verification results show that KNMSs has a high coincidence degree with C-T network at the pathogenic genes, gene functional and topological structure level. It suggests that our proposed KNMS detection model can maximize the retention of functional pathways, the coverage of network topological structure and the coincidence degree of pathogenic genes in the formulas of TCM.

Through the analysis of KNMSs gene enrichment pathways in different formulas, we found that the percentage of gene enrichment pathways of different KNMSs is distinct compare to the gene enrichment pathways of all KNMSs in each formula. In DSD, gene enrichment pathways of DSD1, DSD2 account for more than 95% of gene enrichment pathways of 7 KNMSs. In GFD, the gene enrichment pathways of 4 KNMSs, GFD1, GFD3, GFD4, and GFD5 account for 95.4% of gene enrichment pathways of 10 KNMSs. In HGWD, the gene enrichment pathways of 4 KNMSs, HGWD4, HGWD5, HGWD6, and HGWD8 account for 92.7% of gene enrichment pathways of 10 KNMSs. These KNMSs in each formula play different roles by targeting on common and complementary inflammation-related signaling pathways. These complementary inflammatory signaling pathways include: DSD1 specifically related JAK-STAT signaling pathway and AMPK signaling pathway, DSD2 specifically related NF-kappa B signaling pathway, p53 signaling pathway and Wnt signaling pathway. GFD1 specifically related TNF signaling pathway, IL-17 signaling pathway, GFD3 specifically related Inflammatory mediator regulation of TRP channels and GnRH signaling pathway, HGWD4 specifically related TNF signaling pathway, Hedgehog signaling pathway, HGWD5 specifically related VEGF signaling pathway and mTOR signaling pathway, HGWD6 specifically related cAMP signaling pathway and cGMP-PKG signaling pathway. These results indicate that KNMSs in different formulas have distinct roles and synergistic effects in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

In addition to the difference analysis of each KNMS in different formulas, KEGG enrichment analysis of all KNMSs in each formula were also implemented and revealed that 3 formulas exert the therapeutic effect of RA through common pathway, such as MAPK signaling pathway, cAMP signal pathway etc. or specific pathway, such as VEGF signaling pathway, HIF-1 signaling pathway, PI3K-Akt signaling pathway etc. Among them, MAPK signaling pathway plays an important role in the pathological process of RA (Schett and Zwerina, 2008). Its over-activation is closely related to inflammatory hyperplasia of synovial tissue and destruction of articular cartilage tissue. As an inducible transcription factor, MAPK regulates the expression of many genes and has been considered as a promising target for the treatment of RA (Rubbert-Roth, 2012). Studies have shown that collagen-induced arthritis rats administrated with MAPK signal transduction pathway inhibitor have significant differences in inhibiting synovitis, bone destruction and articular cartilage destruction compared with the group without signal pathway inhibitor (Adelheid et al., 2014). cAMP signal pathway is an important signal pathway for peripheral blood lymphocytes of RA patients. The study found that the cAMP level in peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL) of RA patients increased, and its proliferation response was significantly lower than that of PBL in normal patients. It was also found that the abnormal activation of adenylate cyclase in RA patients was related to the low function of Gi protein (Dai and Wei, 2003). The formation of RA neovascularization depends on the expression of various angiogenic factors, especially VEGF and its receptor in RA (Mi-La et al., 2006). It has been confirmed that VEGF expression is upregulated in synovial macrophages and fibroblasts of RA patients, and VEGF expression is positively correlated with RA disease activity and joint destruction (Kanbe et al., 2015). The articular cavity of RA is anoxic microenvironment. Recent studies have shown that the increased expression of HIF-1 in synovium of RA joint is closely related to the occurrence and development of RA (Xu et al., 2010). PI3K-AKT signal pathway is an important intracellular signal transduction pathway, which is closely related to abnormal apoptosis of RA fibroblast-like synovial cells (RAFLS) (Smith and Walker, 2004). Inhibition of abnormally activated PI3K-AKT signaling pathway or expression of anti-apoptotic molecules can induce apoptosis in RAFLS and have therapeutic effect on RA (Liu and Pope, 2003).

Besides the function analysis, we also analysis and validated the key components in KNMSs of each formula. In DSD, the results suggested that the key component isoliquiritigenin from motif 1 (DSD1) exert effect on treatment of RA possibly through acting on MAPK signaling pathway. Studies have shown that isoliquiritigenin suppresses RANKL-induced osteoclastogenesis and inflammatory bone loss via RANK-TRAF6, MAPK, IκBα/NF-κB, and AP-1 signaling pathways (Zhu et al., 2012). In GFD, the results suggested that the key component isorhamnetin from motif 1 (GFD1) treats RA possibly through acting on TNF signaling pathway. Published reports confirmed that isorhamnetin play intervening roles in the development and progression of RA via anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidative activities. Previous studies have suggested that isorhamnetin attenuates collagen-induced arthritis via modulating the levels of cytokines TNF-α, IL-1β, and IL-6 etc. in the joint tissue homogenate of mice (Wang and Zhong, 2015). In HGWD, the results suggested that the key component quercetin from motif 5 (HGWD5) has therapeutic effect on RA possibly through acting on PI3K-Akt signaling pathway. This also verified by previous studies, which found that the mechanisms responsible for the quercetin-induced apoptosis of FLS from patients with RA are associated with the inhibition of PI3K/AKT pathway activation (Pan et al., 2016). Cellular experiments were applied to prove the reliability of the network pharmacology model through verifying the protective effects of key components in KNMSs of three formulas on the inflammation of mice RAW264.7 cells induced by LPS. In addition, in order to better evaluate the reliability of our proposed network pharmacology model, in vivo study will be conducted in our future research.

To summarize, a network pharmacology-based approach was established to extract core components group and decode the mechanisms of different formulas treat the same disease of TCM. Additionally, our proposed KNMS prediction and validation strategy provides methodological reference for optimization of core components group and interpretation of the molecular mechanism in the treatment of complex diseases using TCM.

Funding

This study is financially supported by the Startup fund from Southern Medical University (grant No. G619280010), the Natural Science Foundation Council of China (grant No. 31501080), Hong Kong Baptist University Strategic Development Fund [grant No. SDF13-1209-P01, SDF15-0324-P02(b) and SDF19-0402-P02], the Key Laboratory of Effective Substances Research and Utilization in TCM of Shanxi Province (No. 201705D111008-21), Hong Kong Baptist University Interdisciplinary Research Matching Scheme (grant No. RC/IRCs/17-18/04), the General Research Fund of Hong Kong Research Grants Council (grant No. 12101018, 12100719, 12102518).

Statements

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation, to any qualified researcher.

Author contributions

A-PL, D-GG, and LG provided the concept and designed the study. K-XW and YG conducted the analyses. K-XW and D-GG wrote the manuscript. K-XW, YG, CL, YL and B-YZ participated in data analysis. X-MQ, G-HD, and A-PL provided oversight. A-PL, D-GG, and LG contributed to revising and proof-reading the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2020.01035/full#supplementary-material

References

  • 1

    AdelheidK.MakiyehT. A.ErdalC.RolandA.JosefS.GeorgS. (2014). Differential tissue expression and activation of p38 MAPK alpha, beta, gamma, and delta isoforms in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum.54 (9), 27452756. doi: 10.1002/art.22080

  • 2

    BangC.HuaZ.FangW.WuJ.LiuX.TangC.et al. (2017). Metabolomics analysis of Danggui Sini decoction on treatment of collagen-induced arthritis in rats. J. Chromatogr. B. Anal. Technol. Biomed. Life Sci.1061-1062, 282291. doi: 10.1016/j.jchromb.2017.07.043

  • 3

    BoZ.XuW.ShaoL. (2013). An Integrative Platform of TCM Network Pharmacology and Its Application on a Herbal Formula, Qing-Luo-Yin. Evidence-Based Complementary Altern. Med.2013 (343), 112. doi: 10.1155/2013/456747

  • 4

    BrzustewiczE.BrylE. (2015). The role of cytokines in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis – Practical and potential application of cytokines as biomarkers and targets of personalized therapy. Cytokine76 (2), 527536. doi: 10.1016/j.cyto.2015.08.260

  • 5

    CaiQ.MaL.GongM. (2014). A survey on network community detection based on evolutionary computation. Int. J. Bio-Inspired Comput.8 (2), 167256. doi: 10.1504/IJBIC.2016.076329

  • 6

    CeciliaO.SaraW.HenrikK. L.MarieH.KarlsonE. W.LarsA.et al. (2013). Parity and the risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis: results from the Swedish Epidemiological Investigation of Rheumatoid Arthritis study. Ann. Rheum. Dis.73 (4), 752755. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203567

  • 7

    ChenY. C. (2012). TCM Database@Taiwan: The World’s Largest Traditional Chinese Medicine Database for Drug Screening In Silico. PloS One6 (1), e15939. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0015939

  • 8

    ChenY. H.ZhaoX. X.WangW. Q. (2009). Simultaneous determination of glycyrrhizin, liquirtin and isoliquirtigenin in licorice by hplc. Chin. J. Inf. Tradit. Chin. Med.16 (8), 5258. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-5304.2009.08.024

  • 9

    ChengB.ZhengH.WuF.WuJ. X.LiuX. W.TangC. L.et al. (2017). Metabolomics analysis of Danggui Sini decoction on treatment of collagen-induced arthritis in rats. J. Chromatogr. B.1061-1062, 282291. doi: 10.1016/j.jchromb.2017.07.043

  • 10

    CorsonT. W.CrewsC. M. (2007). Molecular understanding and modern application of traditional medicines: triumphs and trials. Cell130 (5), 769774. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2007.08.021

  • 11

    DaiM.WeiW. (2003). Research progress of signal transduction mechanism of synoviocytes with rheumatoid arhritis. Chin. Pharmacol. Bull.19 (5), 481485. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-1978.2003.05.001

  • 12

    DamiãoM. C.PasqualotoK. F.PolliM. C.PariseF. R. (2014). To be drug or prodrug: structure-property exploratory approach regarding oral bioavailability. Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Société. Can. Des. Sci. Pharm.17 (4), 532540. doi: 10.18433/J3BS4H

  • 13

    DavidG.AurélienG.MatthiasW.AntoineD.OlivierM.VincentZ. (2014). SwissTargetPrediction: a web server for target prediction of bioactive small molecules. Nucleic Acids Res.42, 3238. doi: 10.1093/nar/gku293

  • 14

    DraghiciS.KhatriP.TarcaA. L.AminK.DoneA.VoichitaC.et al. (2007). A systems biology approach for pathway level analysis. Genome Res.17 (10), 15371545. doi: 10.1101/gr.6202607

  • 15

    FuS.YiW.AiJ.BahA. J.GaoX. (2014). GW25-e3314 Clinical application of “treating different diseases with the same method” - Xuefu Zhuyu Capsule (a traditional Chinese patent medicine) for blood stasis syndrome. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.64 (16), C208C209. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.06.970

  • 16

    GaoJ.LiW.WeiF. (2005). Quantitative analysis of aristolochic acid a in asarum sieboldii by hplc. Chin. Pharm. J. 40 (20), 15791589. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-2494.2005.20.019

  • 17

    GaoH. M.WangZ. M.QuL.FuX. T.LiL. (2007). Determination of calceolarioside b in caulis akebiae by rp-hplc. China J. Chin. Mater. Med.32 (6), 476478. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-5302.2007.06.004

  • 18

    GaoL.WangX.NiuY.DuanD.YangX.HaoJ.et al. (2016). Molecular targets of Chinese herbs: a clinical study of hepatoma based on network pharmacology. Sci. Rep.6 (24944), 24944. doi: 10.1038/srep24944

  • 19

    GaoL.WangK.ZhouY.FangJ.QinX.DuG. (2018). Uncovering the anticancer mechanism of Compound Kushen Injection against HCC by integrating quantitative analysis, network analysis and experimental validation. Sci. Rep.8 (1), 624. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-18325-7

  • 20

    GuoQ.ZhengK.FanD.ZhaoY.LiL.BianY.et al. (2017). Wu-Tou Decoction in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Integrating Network Pharmacology andIn Vivo Pharmacological Evaluation. Front. Pharmacol.8, 230. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2017.00230

  • 21

    HeJ. YGuS. (2008). Effects of Guizhi Fuzi Tang on TNF-α in rheumatoid arthritis rats. J. Pract. Tradit. Chin. Internal Med.22 (12), 4849. doi: 10.13729/j.issn.1671-7813.2008.12.058

  • 22

    JongH. D.GeiselmannJ.HernandezC.PageM. (2003). Genetic Network Analyzer: qualitative simulation of genetic regulatory networks. Bioinformatics19 (3), 336344. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btf851

  • 23

    KanbeK.ChibaJ.InoueY.TaguchiM.YabukiA. (2015). SAT0019 SDF-1/CXCR4 Is associated with the Disease Activity and Bone and Joint Destruction in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with Golimumab. Mod. Rheumatol.74 (Suppl 2), 115. doi: 10.3109/14397595.2015.1054088

  • 24

    KanehisaM.GotoS. (2000). KEGG: kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes. Nucleic Acids Res.27 (1), 2934. doi: 10.1093/nar/28.1.27

  • 25

    KeiserM. J.RothB. L.ArmbrusterB. N.ErnsbergerP.IrwinJ. J.ShoichetB. K. (2007). Relating protein pharmacology by ligand chemistry. Nat. Biotechnol.25 (2), 197206. doi: 10.1038/nbt1284

  • 26

    LiT. TShuZ. H.YuL.HaoW. J.FuX. Y. (2015). Hplc/dad fingerprints and determination of main flavones in radix astragali from different origins. Chin. J. Hosp. Pharmacy. 35 (13), 11821187. doi: 10.13286/j.cnki.chinhosppharmacyj.2015.13.05

  • 27

    LiW. M.ZhaoY. R.YangY. Y.ZhangZ. Q.LaiJ. Y.ZhuangL. (2011). Rp-hplc with uv switch determination of 9 components in white peony root pieces. Chin. J. Pharm. Anal. Volume31 (12), 22082212. doi: 10.1631/jzus.B1000135

  • 28

    LiangK.CuiS.ZhangQ.BiK.QinZ.JiaY. (2011). Uplc simultaneous determination of five active components in cinnamomi ramulus. China J. Chin. Mater. Med.36 (23), 32983301. doi: 10.4268/cjcmm20112317

  • 29

    LipinskiC. A.LombardoF.DominyB. W.FeeneyP. J. (2012). Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings 1. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev.64 (1–3), 417. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2012.09.019

  • 30

    LiuH.PopeR. M. (2003). The role of apoptosis in rheumatoid arthritis. Curr. Opin. Pharmacol.3 (3), 317322. doi: 10.1016/S1471-4892(03)00037-7

  • 31

    LiuJ. W.WangY. H.LiY. Y.ZhangY. G.ZhaoL.ZhangR. N.et al. (2017). Effect of Huangqi Guizhi Wuwutang on Joint Synovial Cell Apoptosis in CIA Rat Models. Chin. J. Exp. Tradit. Med. Formulae.23 (14), 171176. doi: 10.13422/j.cnki.syfjx.2017140171

  • 32

    LiuM.WuF.ZhangW.WangX.MaJ.DaiN.et al. (2019). Molecular mechanism of Sini San and Suanzaoren Tang in treatment of insomnia based on network pharmacology: a comparative study. J. Beijing Univ. Tradit. Chin. Med.42 (01), 4855. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-2157.2019.01.008

  • 33

    LopesC. T.FranzM.KaziF.DonaldsonS. L.MorrisQ.BaderG. D. (2010). Cytoscape Web: an interactive web-based network browser. Bioinformatics26 (18), 23472348. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq430

  • 34

    LuoW.BrouwerC. (2013). Pathview: an R/Bioconductor package for pathway-based data integration and visualization. Bioinformatics29 (14), 18301831. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btt285

  • 35

    LvY. N.LiS. X.ZhaiK. F.KouJ. P.YuB. Y. (2014). Network pharmacology-based prediction and verification of the molecular targets and pathways for schisandrin against cerebrovascular disease. Chin. J. Nat. Med.12 (4), 251258. doi: 10.1016/s1875-5364(14)60051-0

  • 36

    Mi-LaC.Young OkJ.Young-MiM.So-YounM.Chong-HyeonY.Sang-HeonL.et al. (2006). Interleukin-18 induces the production of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in rheumatoid arthritis synovial fibroblasts via AP-1-dependent pathways. Immunol. Lett.103 (2), 159166. doi: 10.1016/j.imlet.2005.10.020

  • 37

    National Pharmacopoeia Commission. Pharmacopoeia of the People's Republic of China: a 2015 edition [S]. (2015) Beijing: China Pharmaceutical Science and Technology Press.

  • 38

    PanF.ZhuL.LvH.PeiC. (2016). Quercetin promotes the apoptosis of fibroblast-like synoviocytes in rheumatoid arthritis by upregulating lncRNAÂ MALAT1. Int. J. Mol. Med.38 (5), 15071514. doi: 10.3892/ijmm.2016.2755

  • 39

    PengD. P.TangX. H.YanY. M. (2013). Effects of Guizhi Fuzi Decoction on tumor necrosis factor in rheumatoid arthritis. Chin. J. Basic Med. Tradit. Chin. Med.19 (10), 11361138.

  • 40

    RadicchiF.CastellanoC.CecconiF.LoretoV.ParisiD. (2004). Defining and identifying communities in networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. States America101 (9), 26582663. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0400054101

  • 41

    RuJ.PengL.WangJ.WeiZ.LiB.ChaoH.et al. (2014). TCMSP: a database of systems pharmacology for drug discovery from herbal medicines. J. Cheminf.6 (1), 13. doi: 10.1186/1758-2946-6-13

  • 42

    Rubbert-RothA. (2012). [New kinase inhibitors]. Z. Für Rheumatol.71 (6), 479484. doi: 10.1007/s00393-011-0880-9

  • 43

    SarauxA.Devauchelle-PensecV.EngerranL.FlipoR. M. (2006). Most rheumatologists are conservative in active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy: results of the PRISME survey. J. Rheumatol.33 (7), 12581265. doi: 10.1016/j.jbspin.2005.12.011

  • 44

    SchettG.ZwerinaJ. (2008). The p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann. Rheum. Dis.67 (7), 909916. doi: 10.1136/ard.2007.074278

  • 45

    ShiX. G.ZhuW.HuangZ. S.ZhaoZ. D.WangZ. W. (2006). Effects of Huangqi Guizhi Wuwu decoction(黄芪桂枝五物汤) on rats with adjuvant arthritis. Pharmacol. Clinics Chin. Mater. Med.22 (34), 35. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-7254.2006.00347.x

  • 46

    SmithM. D.WalkerJ. G. (2004). Apoptosis a relevant therapeutic target in rheumatoid arthritis? Rheumatology43 (4), 405407. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keh084

  • 47

    SodhiA.NaikS.PaiA.AnuradhaA. (2015). Rheumatoid arthritis affecting temporomandibular joint. Contemp. Clin. Dent.6 (1), 124127. doi: 10.4103/0976-237X.149308

  • 48

    SunL.ZhouH. Y.ZhaoR. H.YouC.ChangQ. (2009). Determination of six kinds of monoester- and diester-alkaloids in radix aconitii lateralis praeparata by hplc. Chin. Tradit. Herbal Drugs40 (1), 131134. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0253-2670.2009.01.039

  • 49

    TaoW.XuX.WangX.LiB.WangY.LiY.et al. (2013). Network pharmacology-based prediction of the active ingredients and potential targets of Chinese herbal Radix Curcumae formula for application to cardiovascular disease. J. Ethnopharmacol.145 (1), 110. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2012.09.051

  • 50

    WangX.ZhongW. (2015). Isorhamnetin attenuates collagen-induced arthritis via modulating cytokines and oxidative stress in mice. Int. J. Clin. Exp. Med.8 (9), 1653616542.

  • 51

    WangC.RenQ.ChenX. T.SongZ. Q.NingZ. C.GanJ. H.et al. (2018). System Pharmacology-Based Strategy to Decode the Synergistic Mechanism of Zhi-zhu Wan for Functional Dyspepsia. Front. Pharmacol.9, 841. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2018.00841

  • 52

    WangW. P.ShiS. M.LiuJ.ZhangQ. Q. (2010). Treatment of 31 cases of rheumatoid arthritis of qi-blood deficiency by internal and external administration of modified “Huangqi Guizhi Wuwu Decoction”. Shanghai J. Tradit. Chin. Med. 44 (5), 4345. doi: 10.16305/j.1007-1334.2010.05.014

  • 53

    WangY. J.LiJ.ZhangH. R. (2013). Simultaneous determination of rutin,quercetin and isorhamnetin in zizyphus jujuba cv. jun by hplc. Food Res. Dev.34 (6), 8388. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-6521.2013.06.023

  • 54

    XiaS. U.SongG. U. (2011). Experimengtal Effect of Guizhi Fuzi Decoction on Levels of Interleukin 6 in Adjuvant-Induced Arthritis Rats. J. liaoning Univ. Tradit. Chin. Med.13 (6), 250–25. doi: 10.13194/j.jlunivtcm.2011.06.252.sux.091

  • 55

    XieJ.-J.YuY.WangY.-T.LiS.-P. (2007). Simultaneous hplc determination of 6 components in angelica sinensis. Chin. J. Pharm. Anal.27 (9), 13141317. doi: 10.16155/j.0254-1793.2007.09.008

  • 56

    XuY. D.SongX. M.JinH. T.ZhangS. J. (2010). Expression of HIF-1α and VEGF in synovium of knee joint in adjuvant-induce-arthritis rat. Chin. J. Immunol.4 (26), 360362. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-484X.2010.04.016

  • 57

    XuX.ZhangW.HuangC.LiY.YuH.WangY.et al. (2012). A novel chemometric method for the prediction of human oral bioavailability. Int. J. Mol. Sci.13 (6), 69646982. doi: 10.3390/ijms13066964

  • 58

    XueR.FangZ.ZhangM.YiZ.WenC.ShiT. (2013). TCMID: Traditional Chinese Medicine integrative database for herb molecular mechanism analysis. Nucleic Acids Res.41, D1089. doi: 10.1093/nar/gks1100

  • 59

    YangJ.LeskovecJ. (2012). “Community-Affiliation Graph Model for Overlapping Network Community Detection” in IEEE International Conference on Data Mining.11701175. doi: 10.1109/ICDM.2012.139

  • 60

    YaoG.DanW. U.Jun-ShengT.Yu-ZhiZ.Xiao-XiaG.Xue-MeiQ. (2018). Mechanism of network pharmacology of Xiaoyao Powder and Kaixin Powder in treating depression with “Same disease with different treatments”. Chin. Tradit. Herbal Drugs49 (15), 34833492. doi: 10.7501/j.issn.0253-2670.2018.15.004

  • 61

    ZhangK. W.SongS.CuiX. B.XuZ. Y. (2009). Determination of 6-gingerol and 6-shogaol in ginger of different districts in china. Chin. Pharm. J.44 (22), 16921694.

  • 62

    ZhuL.WeiH.WuY.YangS.XiaoL.ZhangJ.et al. (2012). Licorice isoliquiritigenin suppresses RANKL-induced osteoclastogenesis in vitro and prevents inflammatory bone loss in vivo. Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol.44 (7), 11391152. doi: 10.1016/j.biocel.2012.04.003

Summary

Keywords

Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), rheumatoid arthritis, key gene network motif with significant (KNMS), mechanisms, network pharmacology

Citation

Wang K, Gao Y, Lu C, Li Y, Zhou B, Qin X, Du G, Gao L, Guan D and Lu A (2020) Uncovering the Complexity Mechanism of Different Formulas Treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis Based on a Novel Network Pharmacology Model. Front. Pharmacol. 11:1035. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2020.01035

Received

13 November 2019

Accepted

25 June 2020

Published

10 July 2020

Volume

11 - 2020

Edited by

Per-Johan Jakobsson, Karolinska Institutet (KI), Sweden

Reviewed by

Mingze Qin, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, China; Qiong Wang, Southwest Medical University, China

Updates

Copyright

*Correspondence: Li Gao, ; Dao-gang Guan, ; Ai-ping Lu,

†These authors have contributed equally to this work

This article was submitted to Ethnopharmacology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Pharmacology

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Figures

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article

Article metrics