PROTECTIVE EFFECT OF PYCNOGENOL ON KIDNEY TISSUE IN RATS UNDERGOING IONIZING RADIATION

Öz

Aim: Serious complications of radiation use in cancer treatment include kidney toxicity. Pycnogenol®, consisting of phenolic compounds, can be used as a complement to the treatment of some cancers due to its good tolerability, high anti-oxidant effect and safety. The aim of this study was to histopathologically evaluate the protective effects of Pycnogenol on rat kidney tissue of high doses of ionized radiation (IR).
Method: The 32 Sprague-Dawley male rats used in the study were randomly divided into 4 groups. Groups; the control group, no application was made to rats in this group. The Pycnogenol group was administered to rats in this group with 300 mg/kg of Pycnogenol gavage, which was dissolved with 5% dimethylsulfoxide during the experiment and at the same time of day. In the IR group, rats in this group were subjected to a total of 30 Gy of radiation in 3 days, 10 Gy in a single fraction at the same time in the first, second and third days of the study. Radiation applications were performed in the form of a single dose of total body radiation using gamma rays. The IR + Pycnogenol group gave rats in this group 10 Gy in a single fraction on the first, second and third days of the study and 30 Gy in a total of 3 days of radiation. 300 mg/kg of Pycnogenol was continued with gavage until the end of the experiment, and at the end of the two-week experiment period, the renal tissues of rats belonging to all groups were histopathologically evaluated by Hematoxylene-Eosin staining.
Results: Degenerative and necrotic changes in the interstitial tissue and renal tubule and interstitial nephritis are observed in the radiation groups, while changes and damage were statistically less in the IR+Pycnogenol group.
Conclusion: When the study findings were evaluated, it was determined that IR-related damage to kidney tissue could be mitigated by Pycnogenol administration.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• kidney
• Pycnogenol
• radioprotector
• radiotherapy
• rat

İYONİZE RADYASYON UYGULANAN SIÇANLARDA PYCNOGENOL’ÜN BÖBREK DOKUSU ÜZERİNE KORUYUCU ETKİSİ

Öz

Amaç: Kanser tedavisinde uygulanan radyasyon kullanımının ciddi komplikasyonları arasında böbrek toksisitesi de bulunur. Fenolik bileşiklerden oluşan Pycnogenol®, iyi tolere edilebilmesi, anti-oksidan etkisinin ve güvenliğinin yüksek olmasından dolayı bazı kanserlerin tedavisinde tamamlayıcı olarak kullanılabileceği tartışılmaktadır. Bu çalışma ile yüksek dozda uygulanan iyonize radyasyonun (IR) sıçan böbrek dokusu üzerine Pycnogenol’ün koruyucu etkilerinin histopatolojik olarak değerlendirilmesi amaçlandı.
Yöntem: Çalışmada kullanılan 32 adet Sprague-dawley ırkı erkek sıçanlar rastgele 4 gruba ayrıldı. Gruplar; Kontrol grubu, bu gruptaki sıçanlara herhangi bir uygulama yapılmadı. Pycnogenol grubu, bu gruptaki sıçanlara deney süresince ve günün aynı saatinde %5’lik dimetilsülfoksit ile çözdürülen 300 mg/kg Pycnogenol gavajla uygulandı. IR grubu, bu gruptaki sıçanlara çalışmanın birinci, ikinci ve üçüncü günlerinde, aynı saatte tek fraksiyonda 10 Gy olmak üzere 3 günde toplam 30 Gy radyasyon uygulandı. Radyasyon uygulamaları gama ışını kullanılarak tek doz total vücut ışınlaması şeklinde yapıldı. IR+Pycnogenol grubu, bu gruptaki sıçanlara çalışmanın birinci, ikinci ve üçüncü günlerinde tek fraksiyonda 10 Gy ve 3 günün toplamında 30 Gy radyasyon verildi. Radyasyon uygulamalarından yarım saat önce ve radyasyon uygulaması bittikten sonra da deney sonuna kadar 300 mg/kg Pycnogenol’ün gavajla uygulamasına devam edildi, İki haftalık deney süresi sonunda tüm gruplara ait sıçanların böbrek dokuları Hematoksilen-Eozin boyama ile histopatolojik olarak değerlendirildi.
Bulgular: Radyasyon uygulanan gruplarda; interstisyel dokuda ve böbrek tubuluslarında dejeneratif ve nekrotik değişiklikler ve interstisyel nefritis gözlenirken IR+Pycnogenol grubunda değişiklik ve hasarın istatistiksel olarak daha az olduğu gözlendi.
Sonuç: Çalışma bulguları değerlendirildiğinde; böbrek dokusunda IR’ye bağlı gelişen hasarın Pycnogenol uygulaması ile hafifletilebildiği belirlendi.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Böbrek
• Pycnogenol
• Radyoprotektör
• Radyoterapi
• Sıçan

Kaynakça

1. 1. Özgüner F, Mollaoglu H. Manyetik alanın organizma üzerindeki biyolojik etkileri. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 2006; 13(1):38-41.
2. 2. Park HS, You GE, Yang KH, Kim JY, An S, Song JY, Lee S-J, Lim Y-K, Nam SY. Role of AKT and ERK pathways in controlling sensitivity to ionizing radi-ation and adaptive response induced by low-dose radiation in human immune cells. European Journal of Cell Biology. 2015; 94(12): 653-60.
3. 3. Karbownik M, Reiter RJ. Antioxidative effects of me-latonin in protection against cellular damage cau-sed by ionizing radiation. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine 2000; 225(1): 9-22.
4. 4. Sagar SM. Should patients take or avoid antioxidant supplements during anticancer therapy? An evi-dence-based review. Current Oncology 2005; 12(2): 44-54.
5. 5. Şener G, Jahovic N, Tosun O, et al. Melatonin ameliorates ionizing radiation induced oxidative organ damage in rats. Life Sciences 2003;74:563-72.
6. 6. D’Andrea G. Pycnogenol: A blend of procyanidins with multifaceted therapeutic applications? Fitoterapia, 2010;81(7):724-36.
7. 7. Çıkrıkçı S, Mozioğlu E, Yılmaz H. Biological Activity of Curcuminoids Isolated from Curcuma longa. Records of Natural Products 2008;2(1):19-24.
8. 8. Devaraj S, Vega-López S, Kaul N, et al. Supplementation with a pine bark extract rich in polyphenols increases plasma antioxidant capacity and alters the plasma lipoprotein profile. Lipids 2002; 37: 931–4.

9. 9. Grimm T, Skrabala R, Chovanova Z, Muchova J, Sumegova K, Liptakova A. Single and multiple dose pharmacokinetics of maritime pine bark extract (pycnogenol) after oral administration to healthy volunteers. BMC Clinical Pharmacology 2006; 6:4. doi: 10.1186/1472-6904-6-4
10. 10. Simpson T, Kure C, Stough C. Assessing the Efficacy and Mechanisms of Pycnogenol® on Cognitive Aging From in Vitro Animal and Human Studies. Frontiers in Pharmacology. 2019;10:694. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2019.00694
11. 11. Verheij M, Bartelink H. Radiation-induced apoptosis. Cell and Tissue Research 2000;301(1):133-42.
12. 12. Cohen EP, Robbins ME. Radiation nephropathy. Seminars in Nephrology2003;23(5):486-99.
13. 13. Duport P, Jiang H, Shilnikova NS, Krewski D, Zielins-ki JM. Database of radiogenic cancer in experi-mental animals exposed to low doses of ionizing radiation. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part B, Critical Reviews 2012;15(3):186-209.
14. 14. Sime S, Reeve EV. Protection from inflammation, immunosuppression and carcinogenesis induced by UV radiation in mice by topical pycnogenol. Photochemistry and Photobiology 2004;79:193-8.
15. 15. https://nootropicsexpert.com/pine-bark-extract-pycnogenol/erişim tarihi 29.05.2021
16. 16. Prasanna PG, Stone HB, Wong RS, Capala J, Bern-hard EJ, Vikram B, Coleman CN. Normal tissue protection for improving radiotherapy: Where are the Gaps? Translational Cancer Research 2012;1(1):35-48.
17. 17. Okunieff P, Chen, Maguire D, Huser AK. Molecular markers of radiation-related normal tissue toxicity. Cancer Metastasis Reviews 2008;27(3):363-74.
18. 18. İsmail AF, Zaher NH, El-Hossary EM, El-Gazzar MG. Modulatory effects of new curcumin analogues on gamma-irradiation-induced nephrotoxicity in rats. Chemico-Biological Interactions 2016;260:141-53.
19. 19. Çaloglu M, Yurut-Caloglu V, Durmus-Altun G, Oz-Puyan F, Ustun F, Cosar-Alas R, Saynak M, Par-lar S, Turan FN, Uzal C. Histopathological and scintigraphic comparisons of the protective effects of L-carnitine and amifostine against radiation-induced late renal toxicity in rats. Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology & Physiology 2009;36(5-6):523-30.
20. 20. Kucuktulu E. Protective effect of melatonine against radiation induced nephrotoxicity in rats. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention 2012;13(8):4101-5.
21. 21. Moulder JE, Cohen EP. Radiation-induced multi-organ involvement and failure: The contribution of radiation effects on the renal system. The British Journal of Radiology 2005;27(1):82-8.