The History of Use of Echinacea - Essay Example

1. Echinacea plant Echinacea commonly called the Purple coneflowers is a genus of nine species of herbaceous plants in the Family Asteraceae. All arestrictly native to eastern and central North America. The plants have large showy heads of composite flowers, blooming from early to late summer. The genus name is from the Greek echino, meaning "spiny", due to the spiny central disk. They are herbaceous, drought-tolerant perennial plants growing to 1 or 2 m in height. The leaves are lanceolate to elliptic, 10-20 cm long and 1.5-10 cm broad. Like all Asteraceae, the flowers are a composite inflorescence, with purple (rarely yellow or white) florets arranged in a prominent, somewhat cone-shaped head; "cone-shaped" because the petals of the outer ray florets tend to point downward (are reflexed) once the flower head opens, thus forming a cone. 1.1 History In comparison with other medicinal plants, the history of use of Echinacea is relatively short. The plant originates from North America and was employed by the indigenous Indians. The first archaeological evidence dates from the 18th century. Included in the name Echinacea or purple coneflower are several species of the Asteraceae family: Echinacea purpurea (L.) Moench, Echinacea angustifolia DC. and Echinacea pallida Nutt. Information about the use of the plant from traditional healers ranges from external application for wounds, burns and insect bites to the chewing of roots for toothache and throat infections, and internal application for pain, coughs, stomach cramps and snake bites. The interest of white settlers was also drawn to this medicinal plant. The first Echinacea preparation, known as Meyers Blood Purifier, arrived on the market around 1880, with rheumatism, neuralgia and rattlesnake bites as indications. At the beginning of the 20th century, Echinacea was the most frequently used plant preparation in the USA. Commercial cultivation was started in Germany around 1939. The introduction and cultivation of Echinacea in Switzerland by A. Vogel was around 1950. Chemists and pharmacologists became interested in Echinacea and many constituents are now known, such as polysaccharides, echinacoside, cichoric acid, ketoalkenes and alkylamides. The extracts exhibit immunostimulant properties and are mainly used in the prophylaxis and therapy of colds, flu and septic complaints. Although there are over 400 publications concerning the plant and dozens of preparations of Echinacea n the market, the true identity of the active principles still remains open. (1) The genus Echinacea includes about nine species amongst them three species of echinacea has been used medicinally: E.Angustifolia, E.Pallida, and E. Purpure. A medical study found that when echinacea products made from the entire plant (not just the root) were taken after the second cold symptom appeared they provided no measurable beneficial effect for children in treating the severity or duration of symptoms caused by the common cold virus. Dosage however was about a third of what clinical herbalists routinely use, and the leaves and stems are not known to be clinically effective (2). Studies by the University of Virginia School of Medicine confirmed these results, and added that Echinacea had no clinically significant effects on the common cold even if taken immediately upon infection, or as a prophylaxis starting a week prior to symptoms of infection (3). However, a University of Maryland review of available studies concluded that Echinacea, when taken at first sign of a cold, reduced cold symptoms or shortened their duration. This conclusion was based on 13 European studies (4). The University of Maryland study also found that three of four studies concluded that taking Echinacea to prevent a cold was ineffective, although including studies that use subclinical doses, the wrong part or unassayed material will bias such conclusions. Another scientific review, however, of 14 published studies found that the incidence of colds was reduced by 58% and the duration by a day and half. (5). 1.2 Chemistry Echinacea species contain a great variety of chemical components that contribute to their activity. Some of the constituents are unique to one species, while others occur in two or more of the commercially important species. Seven classes of secondary compounds are considered important to the therapeutic actions of Echinacea, and these have received the most intensive study Fig: 1 Representative compounds from Echinacea sp. (6) The full spectrum of echinacea's chemical components responsible for its health effects is not well understood. Like most crude drugs from plant or animal origin, the constituent base is complex and some parts may be directly antimicrobial while others work at stimulating or modulating different parts of the immune system. All species have chemical compounds called phenols, which are common to many other plants. Both the phenol compounds Cichoric and caftaric are present in E. purpurea, other phenols include echinacoside, which is found in greater levels within E. angustifolia and E. pallida roots than in other species. When making herbal remedies, these phenols can serve as markers to evaluate the quantity of echinacea in the product. Other chemical constituents that may be important in echinacea health effects include alkylamides and polysaccharides (6). Preparations from Echinacea purpurea are among the most widely used herbal medicines. Most uses of E. purpurea are based on the reported immunological properties. A series of experiments have demonstrated that E. purpurea extracts do indeed demonstrate significant immunomodulatory activities. Among the many pharmacological properties reported, macrophage activation has been demonstrated most convincingly. Phagocytotic indices and macrophage-derived cytokine concentrations have been shown to be Echinacea-responsive in a variety of assays. Activation of polymorphonuclear leukocytes and natural killer cells has also been reasonably demonstrated. Changes in the numbers and activities of T- and B-cell leukocytes have been reported, but are less certain. Despite this cellular evidence of immunostimulation, pathways leading to enhanced resistance to infectious disease have not been described adequately. Several dozen human experiments--including a number of blind randomized trials--have reported health benefits. The most robust data come from trials testing E. purpurea extracts in the treatment for acute upper respiratory infection. Although suggestive of modest benefit, these trials are limited both in size and in methodological quality. Hence, while there is a great deal of moderately good-quality scientific data regarding E. purpurea, effectiveness in treating illness or in enhancing human health has not yet been proven beyond a reasonable doubt (7). Although there have been scientific studies evaluating echinacea, its effectiveness has not been convincingly demonstrated. For example, a peer-reviewed clinical study published in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded that "extracts of E. angustifolia root, either alone or in combination, do not have clinically significant effects on rhinovirus infection or on the clinical illness that results from it." (8, 9) Recent randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in adults have not shown a beneficial effect of echinacea on symptom severity or duration of the cold. (10,11) A structured review of 9 placebo controlled studies suggested that the effectiveness of echinacea in the treatment of colds has not been established(12). Conversely, two recent meta-analyses of published medical articles concluded that there is some evidence that echinacea may reduce either the duration or severity of the common cold, but results are not fully consistent. However, there have been no large, randomized placebo-controlled clinical studies that definitively demonstrate either prophylaxis or therapeutic effects in adults. (5,13) A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 407 children of ages ranging from 2 to 11 years showed that echinacea did not reduce the duration of the cold, or reduce the severity of the symptoms (14). Reported adverse effects of echinacea include nausea, dizziness, dyspnea, rash, dermatitis, pruritis, and hepatotoxicity. These tend to be infrequent, mild and transient. Echinacea should not be taken with hepatotoxic drugs or immunosuppressants. Forty-five percent of retail echinacea products failed quality testing by an independent consumer testing laboratory, due to either high lead levels, or low plant chemicals. 2. HL 60 cell lines 2.1 The HL60 cell line was established in 1977 from a patient with acute myeloid leukaemia. The cells largely resemble promyelocytes but can be induced to differentiate terminally in vitro. Some reagents cause HL60 cells to differentiate to granulocyte-like cells, others to monocyte/macrophage-like cells. The HL60 cell genome contains an amplified c-myc proto-oncogene; c-myc mRNA levels are correspondingly high in undifferentiated cells but decline rapidly following induction of differentiation. These features have made the HL60 cell line an attractive model for studies of human myeloid cell differentiation (15) At present these lines are homogenous, readily maintainable in culture, and, most important, exist in an arrested yet pliant state of maturation. Phenotypically, HL-60 resemble blast cells of their lineage and are believed to be the neoplastic derivatives of committed progenitors of granulocytes (16). 2.2 The HL-60 cultured cell line provides a continuous source of human cells for studying the molecular events of myeloid differentiation and the effects of physiologic, pharmacologic, and virologic elements on this process. Gallagher et al. (1979) report that the characterization of HL-60 cells from a patient with acute promyelocytic leukemia is predominantly a neutrophilic promyelocyte. HL-60 cell model was used to study the effect of DNA topoisomerase (topo) II and II on differentiation and apoptosis of cells. Thus, HL-60 cell line provides a unique in vitro model system for studying the cellular and molecular events, especially in the dielectrophoresis study that aqueous environment suspended and round cells are needed. (17).The HL-60 cell line, derived from a single patient with acute promyelocytic leukemia, provides a unique in vitro model system for studying the cellular and molecular events involved in the proliferation and differentiation of normal and leukemic cells of the granulocyte/monocyte/macrophage lineage (18). HL60 cell line is an attractive model for studying the human myeloid cell differentiation. Due all the above advantages, this cell line was chose in studying the proliferation rate of HL60 at different concentrations of Echinacea extracts. To state the suitable concentration and toxicity which will be used (the best dose of Echinacea for HL60 cells). The Haemocytometer will be used to count the HL60 cells (up to >200 or >100 cells at least) by using the equation of counts the cells number. Further, the population growth curve for cells in batch culture should follow a predictable S-shape. 3. Aims The aim of the present work was to investigate the proliferation rate of HL60 cells increase or decrease by adding Echinacea extracts. Sources: 1. Collins SJ 2003, 'History of a plant: the example of Echinacea', Forsch Komplementarmed Klass Naturheilkd. p 12. 2. Taylor JA 2003, 'Efficacy and safety of echinacea in treating upper respiratory tract infections in children: a randomized controlled trial', Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 290, no.21, p 2824. 3. Turner RB, 2005, 'An evaluation of Echinaceae angustifolia in experimental rhinovirus infections', New England Journal of Medicine, vol.353,p 341. 4. Bergner P 1997, 'Healing Power of Echinacea and Goldenseal and Other Immune System Herbs' (The Healing Power) 5. Shah, SA, Sander,S, White, C, Rinaldi, M & Coleman, C 2007 'Evaluation of echinacea for the prevention and treatment of the common cold: a meta-analysis',The Lancet Infectious Diseases. vol 7 no.7 p 473. 6. MDidea professional extracts, 7. Barrett B 2003, 'Medicinal properties of Echinacea: a critical review. Phytomedicine', vol. 10, no.1,p. 66. 8. Turner, RB, Bauer,R, Woelkart,K, Hulsey, TC & Gangemi, JD. 2005, 'An Evaluation of Echinacea angustifolia in Experimental Rhinovirus Infections', New England Journal of Medicine, vol.353, no.4, p. 341. 9. Kolta Gina. "Study Says Popular Herb Has No Effect on Colds", New York Times, 2006-07-28. 10. Yale SH, Liu K 2004,'Echinacea purpurea therapy for the treatment of the common cold: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial'. Archives International Medicne, vol.164, no.11, p.1237. 11. Barrett BP, Brown RL, Locken K, Maberry R, Bobula JA & D'Alessio D.2002. 'Treatment of the common cold with unrefined echinacea. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial', Annual Internal Medicine, vol.137, no.12, p. 939. 12. Caruso TJ & Gwaltney JM 2005, 'Treatment of the common cold with echinacea: a structured review', Clinical Infectious Disease,vol.40, no.6, p.807. 13. Linde, K, Barrett B, Wlkart K, Bauer R & Melchart D, 'Echinacea for preventing and treating the common cold', Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 14. Taylor JA, Weber W, Standish L, Quinn H, Goesling J, McGann M & Calabrese C. 2003. 'Efficacy and safety of echinacea in treating upper respiratory tract infections in children: a randomized controlled trial', vol. 290, no. 21, p. 2824. 15. Birnie GD, 1988 'The HL60 cell line: a model system for studying human myeloid cell differentiation, Breast Journal Cancer Supplement, vol. 9 p.41. 16. Harris, P & Ralph, P. 1985, 'Human Leukemic Models of Myelomonocytic Development: A of the HL-60 and U937 Cell Lines', Journal of Leukocyte Biology, vol. 37, p. 407. 17. Breitman, T, Collins, S & Keene, B, 1980 'Replacement of serum by insulin and transferring supports growth and differentiation of the human promyelocytic leukemia cell line, HL-60', Experimental Cell Research, vol.126,p.494. 18. Collins SJ, 1987 'The HL-60 promyelocytic leukemia cell line: proliferation, differentiation, and cellular oncogene expression', Blood, vol. 70, no.5, p. 1233. Read More