OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the metabolite changes along the developmental stages of a local stevia cultivar.
METHODOLOGY: Stevia leaves were harvested at 4 different developmental stages (early vegetative, late vegetative, budding, and flowering). Samples were then subjected to LC-MS metabolomics analysis to determine the metabolite variations.
RESULTS: A total of 55 metabolites, comprising phenolic acids, flavonoids, and terpenoids were identified by MS/MS analysis of the stevia leaf extracts, revealing a metabolite profile which was comparatively similar with those of cultivars grown in other countries. PLS-DA differentiated the early vegetative stage stevia leaf samples from those of the later stages by higher content of phenolic acids. The leaf metabolomes of the later 3 stages (late vegetative, budding, and flowering) were collectively richer in flavonoids. Meanwhile, the content of steviol glycosides is highest during the late vegetative and budding stages.
CONCLUSION: The present study provided, for the first time, a general overview of the metabolite variations with regard to the different developmental stages of stevia. The information may facilitate decision making of suitable harvesting times for higher yields of steviol glycosides or a more balanced metabolite profile in terms of pharmacologically useful metabolites.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 197 participants were randomly assigned to either the 8-week Kuala Lumpur Qigong Trial or control groups in 2010-2011. Measurement taken at baseline and post- intervention included QoL, distress and fatigue. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and Kruskal Wallis were used to examine for differences between groups in the measurements.
RESULTS: There were 95 consenting participants in this 8week trial. The adherence rates were 63% for Qigong and 65% for the placebo group. The Qigong group showed significant marginal improvement in Quality of life scores compared to placebo (mean difference=7.3 unit; p=0.036), compared to usual care (mean difference=6.7 unit; p=0.048) on Functional Assessment Cancer Therapy-Breast measure. There were no significant changes between the placebo and usual care groups in fatigue or distress at post intervention (8-week).
CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors who participated in the Qigong intervention showed slightly better QOL. Follow up studies are greatly needed to evaluate which subgroups may best benefit from Qigong. With a steep rise of cancer survivors, there is an urgent need to explore and engage more cultural means of physical activity to fight side effects of treatment and for cancer control in developing countries.
METHOD: The clinical trial was conducted at University Malaya Medical Centre between 2006 and 2008. The experimental group underwent a 4-week self management program, and the control group underwent usual care. Two years after the intervention, questionnaires were randomly posted out to the participants.
RESULTS: A total of 51 questionnaires returned. There were statistically differences between groups in psychological, self-care, mobility and participation aspects in PIPP (p<0.05). The experimental group reported having higher confidence to live with breast cancer compared to control group (p<0.05). There were significant between-group changes in anxiety scores at T2 (immediately after intervention) to T4 (two years later), and the differences in anxiety scores within groups between time point T2 and T4 were significantly different (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: The SAMA program is potentially capable to serve as a model intervention for successful transition to survivorship following breast cancer treatment. The program needs to be further tested for efficacy in a larger trial involving more diverse populations of women completing breast cancer treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHOD: The Qigong trial is a three-arm trial with a priori power size of 114 patients for 80% power. The University Malaya Medical Centre database showed a total of 1,933 patients from 2006-2010 and 751 patients met our inclusion criteria. These patients were approached via telephone interview. 131 out of 197 patients attended the trial and the final response rate was 48% (n=95/197).
RESULTS: Multiple barriers were identified, and were regrouped as patient- related, clinician-related and/or institutional related. A major consistent barrier was logistic difficulty related to transportation and car parking at the Medical Centre. conclusions: All clinical trials must pay considerable attention to the recruitment process and it should even be piloted to identify potential barriers and facilitators to reduce attrition rate in trials.
METHODS: The N. oleracea fractions were obtained using solid phase extraction (SPE). A metabolomics approach that coupled the use of proton nuclear magnetic resonance (1H NMR) with multivariate data analysis (MVDA) was applied to distinguish the metabolite variations among the N. oleracea fractions, as well as to assess the correlation between metabolite variation and the studied bioactivities (DPPH free radical scavenging and α-glucosidase inhibitory activities). The bioactive fractions were then subjected to ultra-high performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) analysis to profile and identify the potential bioactive constituents.
RESULTS: The principal component analysis (PCA) discriminated EF and MF from the other fractions with the higher distributions of phenolics. Partial least squares (PLS) analysis revealed a strong correlation between the phenolics and the studied bioactivities in the EF and the MF. The UHPLC-MS/MS profiling of EF and MF had tentatively identified the phenolics present. Together with some non-phenolic metabolites, a total of 37 metabolites were tentatively assigned.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this work supported that N. oleracea is a rich source of phenolics that can be potential antioxidants and α-glucosidase inhibitors for the management of diabetes. To our knowledge, this study is the first report on the metabolite-bioactivity correlation and UHPLC-MS/MS analysis of N. oleracea fractions.
Please provide feedback to Administrator (firstname.lastname@example.org)