Evidence Hub

Assessment of Quercetin Antiemetic Properties: In Vivo and In Silico Investigations on Receptor Binding Affinity and Synergistic Effects

R. Chowdhury, Md. Shimul Bhuia, Asraful Islam Rakib, Rubel Hasan, H. Coutinho, I. M. Araújo, I. R. A. de Menezes, Muhammad Torequl Islam

Plants, 2023

51 citations

Abstract

Quercetin (QUA), a flavonoid compound, is ubiquitously found in plants and has demonstrated a diverse range of biological activities. The primary objective of the current study is to assess the potential antiemetic properties of QUA using an in vivo and in silico approach. In this experiment, 4-day-old chicks were purchased to induce emesis by orally administering copper sulfate pentahydrate (CuSO4·5H2O) at a dose of 50 mg/kg (orally). Domperidone (DOM) (6 mg/kg), Hyoscine (HYS) (21 mg/kg), and Ondansetron (OND) (5 mg/kg) were treated as positive controls (PCs), and distilled water and a trace amount of Tween 80 mixture was employed as a negative control (NC). QUA was given orally at two distinct doses (25 and 50 mg/kg). Additionally, QUA (50 mg/kg) and PCs were administered separately or in combination to assess their antagonistic or synergistic effects on the chicks. The binding affinity of QUA and referral ligands towards the serotonin receptor (5HT3), dopamine receptors (D2 and D3), and muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (M1–M5) were estimated, and ligand–receptor interactions were visualized through various computational tools. In vivo findings indicate that QUA (25 and 50 mg/kg) has a significant effect on reducing the number of retches (16.50 ± 4.65 and 10.00 ± 4.19 times) and increasing the chick latency period (59.25 ± 4.75 and 94.25 ± 4.01 s), respectively. Additionally, QUA (50 mg/kg) in combination with Domperidone and Ondansetron exhibited superior antiemetic…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a preprint, done in animal and computer models (in silico), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free