Fructus Ligustri Lucidi in Osteoporosis: A Review of its Pharmacology, Phytochemistry, Pharmacokinetics and Safety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Fructus Ligustri Lucidi (FLL) has now attracted increasing attention as an alternative medicine in the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. This study aimed to provide a general review of traditional interpretation of the actions of FLL in osteoporosis, main phytochemical constituents, pharmacokinetics, pharmacology in bone improving effect, and safety. Materials and Methods: Several databases, including PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, National Science and Technology Library, China Science and Technology Journal Database, and Web of Science were consulted to locate publications pertaining to FLL. The initial inquiry was conducted for the presence of the following keywords combinations in the abstracts: Fructus Ligustri Lucidi, osteoporosis, phytochemistry, pharmacokinetics, pharmacology, osteoblasts, osteoclasts, salidroside. About 150 research papers and reviews were consulted. Results: FLL is assumed to exhibit anti-osteoporotic effects by improving liver and kidney deficiencies and reducing lower back soreness in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM). The data from animal and cell experiments demonstrate that FLL is able to improve bone metabolism and bone quality in ovariectomized, growing, aged and diabetic rats through the regulation of PTH/FGF-23/1,25-(OH)2D3/CaSR, Nox4/ROS/NF-κB, and OPG/RANKL/cathepsin K signaling pathways. More than 100 individual compounds have been isolated from this plant. Oleanolic acid, ursolic acid, salidroside, and nuzhenide have been reported to exhibit the anti-osteoporosis effect. The pharmacokinetics data reveals that salidroside is one of the active constituents, and that tyrosol is hard to detect under physiological conditions. Acute and subacute toxicity studies show that FLL is well tolerated and presents no safety concerns. Conclusions: FLL provides a new option for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis, which attracts rising interests in identifying potential anti-osteoporotic compounds and fractions from this plant. Further scientific evidences are expected from well-designed clinical trials on its bone protective effects and safety.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".