METHODS: Uncaria gambir extracts at concentrations ranging from 1000 to 7.8 µg/ml and MTA eluates at 4- and 48 h setting times were prepared. 10% dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and culture media were used as positive and negative controls respectively. Cell viability on days 1, 2, 3 and 7 was analysed using Alamar Blue and Live and Dead Cell assay. Any morphological cellular changes were evaluated using transmission electron microscopes (TEM). Data were analysed using a two-way mixed Analysis of Variance (ANOVA).
RESULTS: The interaction between the concentration and exposure time on the fluorescence intensity of Uncaria gambir extract and MTA 48 h was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.001). No cytotoxic effects on the cells were exerted by both MTA 48 h and Uncaria gambir extract at a concentration below 500 µg/mL. TEM analysis and Live and Dead Cell assay for both materials were comparable to the negative control. No significant differences in fluorescent intensity were observed between Uncaria gambir extract at 500 µg/mL and MTA 48 h (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Uncaria gambir extracts at a maximum concentration of 500 μg/mL are non-cytotoxic over time and are comparable to the MTA.
METHODS: A single centre, latin-square cross-over, double masked, randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted on 45 chronic generalized gingivitis subjects who were chosen from the dental clinic of MAHSA University, Malaysia. A total of 45 subjects were randomly assigned into one of the three different groups (n = 15 each) using a computer-generated random allocation sequence: Group A Propolis mouthwash; Group B Chlorhexidine mouthwash; and Group C Placebo mouthwash. Supragingival plaque and gingival inflammation were assessed by full mouth Plaque index (PI) and gingival index (GI) at baseline and after 21 days. The study was divided into three phases, each phase lasted for 21 days separated by a washout period of 15 days in between them. Groups A, B and C were treated with 0.2% Propolis, Chlorhexidine, and Placebo mouthwash, respectively, in phase I. The study subjects were instructed to use the assigned mouthwash twice daily for 1 min for 21 days. On day 22nd, the subjects were recalled for measurement of PI and GI. After phase I, mouthwash was crossed over as dictated by the Latin square design in phase II and III.
RESULTS: At baseline, intergroup comparison revealed no statistically significant difference between Groups A, B and C (p > 0.05). On day 21, one-way ANOVA revealed statistically significant difference between the three groups for PI (p
METHODS: This multicenter randomized double-blind placebo-controlled phase 2 trial included 110 solid malignant tumor patients (stage II-IV) undergoing chemotherapy. They were randomly selected and provided oral Nuvastatic™ 1000 mg (N = 56) or placebo (N = 54) thrice daily for 9 weeks. The primary outcomes were fatigue (Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI)) and Visual Analog Scale for Fatigue (VAS-F)) scores measured before and after intervention at baseline and weeks 3, 6, and 9. The secondary outcomes were mean group difference in the vitality subscale of the Medical Outcome Scale Short Form-36 (SF-36) and urinary F2-isoprostane concentration (an oxidative stress biomarker), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scores, adverse events, and biochemical and hematologic parameters. Analysis was performed by intention-to-treat (ITT). Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed by two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance (mixed ANOVA).
RESULTS: The Nuvastatic™ group exhibited an overall decreased fatigue score compared with the placebo group. Compared with the placebo group, the Nuvastatic™ group significantly reduced BFI-fatigue (BFI fatigue score, F (1.4, 147) = 16.554, p