Anti-atherosclerotic effect of geniposidic acid in a rabbit model and related cellular mechanisms

Figures & data

Figure 1. The chemical structure of geniposidic acid.

Figure 2. Microscographs of HE staining on rabbit thoracic aorta (200 ×): (A) normal group, (B) 240 mg/kg geniposidic acid group, and (C) model control group.

Figure 3. Microscographs of HE staining on rabbit thoracic aorta (100 ×): (A) normal group, (B) 240 mg/kg geniposidic acid group, and (C) model control group.

Table 1. The effects of geniposidic acid on rabbit aortic plaque area, intimal/medial thickness ratio, and the foam cell number in the AS model.

Groups	Dose (mg/kg)	Plaque area (mm^2)	Intimal/medial thickness ratio	Foam cells number/mm^2
Normal control group	–	0	0.04 ± 0.05	0.24 ± 0.02
Model control group	–	713 ± 105.24	1.30 ± 0.16	25.42 ± 4.37
Geniposidic acid (low dose)	80	537 ± 84.3**	0.78 ± 0.12**	17.25 ± 2.16**
Geniposidic acid (middle dose)	160	392 ± 25.4**ΔΔ	0.43 ± 0.09**ΔΔ	10.74 ± 3.20**ΔΔ
Geniposidic acid (high dose)	240	270 ± 11.7**ΔΔ	0.29 ± 0.13**ΔΔ	6.22 ± 2.71**ΔΔ

Geniposidic acid at doses of 80, 160, and 240 mg/kg was administrated for 12 weeks in geniposidic acid subgroups. Rabbits in the normal control group and the model control group were only treated with the same volume of solvent (water). Data were expressed as the mean ± S.E.M. (n = 6). Compared with the model control group,*p < 0.05,**p < 0.01. Compared with geniposidic acid (low dose) group, Δp < 0.05, ΔΔp < 0.01.

Table 2. The effects of geniposidic acid on EC proliferation.

	OD values			Increasing
Groups	12 h	24 h	48 h	percentage at 48 h (%)
Control group (blank serum)	0.109 ± 0.015	0.141 ± 0.011	0.155 ± 0.018	–
Geniposidic acid (25 μg/ml)	0.114 ± 0.024	0.153 ± 0.011*	0.169 ± 0.019	14.14
Geniposidic acid (50 μg/ml)	0.126 ± 0.020*	0.161 ± 0.010**	0.177 ± 0.029*	22.22
Geniposidic acid (100 μg/ml)	0.146 ± 0.034*Δ	0.202 ± 0.042**Δ	0.215 ± 0.047*Δ	60.61

Geniposidic acid at doses of 25, 50, and 100 μg/ml was added into the culture medium in geniposidic acid subgroups. ECs in the control group were only cultured in the normal culture medium. Data were expressed as the mean ± S.E.M. (n = 6). Compared with the control group, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. Compared with the geniposidic acid (low dose) group, Δp < 0.05, ΔΔp < 0.01.

Figure 4. The crystal violet staining of HUASMCs on each group: (A) 100 μg/ml geniposidic acid group and (B) control group.

Table 3. The effects of geniposidic acid on HUASMCs proliferation and migration.

	OD values			Cells migration number
Groups	12 h	18 h	24 h	24 h later (n = 3)
Control group (blank serum)	0.198 ± 0.02	0.282 ± 0.04	0.247 ± 0.05	39.1 ± 4.2
Geniposidic acid (25 μg/ml)	0.184 ± 0.01	0.263 ± 0.04	0.259 ± 0.04	35.4 ± 5.5
Geniposidic acid (50 μg/ml)	0.172 ± 0.03	0.211 ± 0.04*	0.241 ± 0.07	31.6 ± 5.3*
Geniposidic acid (100 μg/ml)	0.138 ± 0.02**ΔΔ	0.141 ± 0.02**ΔΔ	0.150 ± 0.02**ΔΔ	28.7 ± 4.3**

Geniposidic acid at doses of 25, 50, and 100 μg/ml were added into the culture medium in geniposidic acid subgroups. HUASMCs in the control group were only cultured in the normal culture medium. Data were expressed as the mean ± S.E.M. (n = 6). Compared with the control group, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. Compared with the geniposidic acid (low dose) group, Δp < 0.05, ΔΔp < 0.01.