Differences in p38-STAT3-S100A11 signaling after the administration of aristolochic acid I and IVa may account for the disparity in their nephrotoxicity

Abstract

BackgroundThe safety of herbs containing aristolochic acids (AAs) has become a widespread concern. Previous reports indicate that AAs are highly nephrotoxic and carcinogenic, although there are more than 170 analogues of aristolochic acid. Not all AAs have the same degree of nephrotoxicity or carcinogenicity. Previous studies have found that aristolochic acid IVa (AA-IVa), the principal component of AAs within members of the Aristolochiaceae family, especially Asarum, a commonly used herb in China, has essentially no significant nephrotoxicity. However, several studies, including ours, have shown that aristolochic acid I (AA-I) is clearly nephrotoxic. PurposeThe focus of the study was to elucidate the molecular mechanism responsible for the difference in nephrotoxicity between the AA-I and AA-IVa. Study design/methodMice were administered with AA-I or AA-IVa for 22 weeks through the oral route, followed by a 50-week recovery time. The kidney tissues of mice were extracted at the end of 22 weeks. Pathological examination and proteomic detection (tandem mass tagging (TMT) and phosphorylated proteomics) were performed on the kidney tissue to investigate the key signaling pathways and targets of AAs-induced renal interstitial fibrosis (RIF). The key signaling pathways and targets were verified by Western blot (WB), siRNA transfection, and luciferase assays. ResultsAA-I caused severe nephrotoxicity, high mortality, and extensive RIF. However, the same AA-IVa dosage exhibited almost no nephrotoxicity and does not trigger RIF. The activation of the p38-STAT3-S100A11 signaling pathway and upregulated expression of α smooth muscle actin (α-SMA) and Bcl2-associated agonist of cell death (Bad) proteins could be the molecular mechanism underlying AA-I-induced nephrotoxicity. On the other hand, AA-IVa did not regulate the activation of the p38-STAT3-S100A11 signaling pathway and had relatively little effect on the expression of α-SMA and Bad. Consequently, the difference in the regulation of p38-STAT3-S100A11 pathway, α-SMA, and Bad proteins between AA-I and AA-IVa may be responsible for the divergence in their level of nephrotoxicity. ConclusionThis is the first study to reveal the molecular mechanism underlying the difference in nephrotoxicity between AA-I and AA-IVa. Whether STAT3 is activated or not may be the key factor leading to the difference in nephrotoxicity between AA-I and AA-IVa.