Plant material collection and extraction
Medicago Sativa plant samples were collected from commercial farms at Al-Azraq, south of Jordan. Samples were sent to the Royal Society for the Conservation of Nature (Amman, Jordan) for identification and authentication. The plant was dried under the sun for 3 days then grinded using a blender and stocked in a dark, dry place at room temperature. A 50 g of dry plant material was soaked in methanol for 24 h. The prepared extract was filtered and evaporated until completely dried. The extract was stored in a dark place at room temperature until used.
Determination of total phenols content
Total phenol was determined using Folin-Ciocalteu method [14]. Briefly, 1 ml of serial dilutions of the plant extract were added into 4ml of 7.5% Na2CO3 and 5ml Folin-Ciocalteu reagent. These mixtures were covered and kept at room temperature for 1 h and absorbance was recorded for each extract concentration using UV-V spectrophotometer at 765nm. All concentrations were expressed as mg equivalents to gallic acid per gram of plant extract (mg/g) based on Equation 1:
Total phenol (mg equivalents to gallic acid /g of plant extract)
= (Y- 0.0042)/ 0.0004 X 100 mg/ 1000 ml
Determination of total flavonoids content
Total flavonoids content was determined by the colorimetric method described by [15], [16]. Briefly, 1 ml of serial dilution from each sample was added into 0.5 ml AlCl3, 0.5 ml NaNO2, 2 ml NaOH and 4 ml distilled water. After 15 minutes, the absorbance was recorded using a UV-V spectrophotometer at 510 nm (Shimadzu, Japan). All concentrations were expressed as mg equivalents to quercetin per gram of plant extract (mg/g) based on Equation 2:
Total flavonoid (mg equivalents to quercetin / g of plant extract) (mg/g)
= (Y+ 0.0035)/0.0037 X 100mg/1000ml
Determination of antioxidant
The principle of the antioxidant assay was based on the method described by [17]. Briefly, 1 ml of serial dilutions of the plant extract were added into 3ml of prepared DPPH and 6ml of methanol. The mixtures were placed for 30 minutes in a dark place then the absorbances were recorded using UV-V spectrophotometer at 517nm. Trolox was used as a control to prepare the calibration curve. Inhibition percent was calculated using Equation 3:
HPLC/MS-MS analysis for plant extracts
Stock solutions for the plant extract were prepared by dissolving a 2 mL of crude extract in Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), then diluted with Acetonitrile and used for injection into the II ESI-Q-TOF System equipped with Bruker Dalotonik Elute UPLC system (Bremen, Germany) for screening of compounds of interest. Standards were used for the identification of m/z with high-resolution Bruker TOF MS and the exact retention time of each analyte after chromatographic separation. This instrument was operated using the Ion Source Apollo II ion Funnel electrospray source. Chromatographic separation was performed using Bruker solo 2.0 C-18 UHPLC column (100 mm x 2.1 mm x 2.0 μm) at a flow rate of 0.51 mL/min and a column temperature of 40 °C. The mobile phase was composed of water with 0.05% formic acid and acetonitrile. Gradient: 0 – 27 min linear gradient from 5% - 80% B; 27– 29 min 95% B; 29.1 min 5% B, total analysis time was 35 min on positive and 35 min on negative mode, injection volume 3 ul.
Formulation of Creams
A 10% and 20% M. Sativa extract containing creams, and 0.002 % bergapten cream were prepared as oil in water emulsion as shown in Table 1. The oil phase was prepared by melting the stearic acid, white soft Paraffin and emulsifying wax at 70°C and mixing the ingredients uniformly. The aqueous phase was prepared by dissolving the water-soluble ingredients (glycerol, propylene glycol, triethanolamine, Methylparaben, and Medico Sativa extract) in deionized water.
For bergapten cream, 0.002 g bergapten was dissolved in propylene glycol and then added to the aqueous phase. The water phase was warmed to 70°C until all ingredients were dissolved. When the water and oil phases were at the same temperature, the aqueous phase was slowly added to the oil phase with moderate agitation and was kept stirred until the temperature dropped to 40°C. The emulsion was cooled to room temperature to form a semisolid cream base. The mixture was stirred for 15 min until the formulation became uniform.
Physical Stability test for cream
A stability test was performed throughout the study (4 weeks) for the 10% and 20% M. sativa extract cream. 3 samples of each plant extract cream were taken. The first sample was stored at 4oC, the second sample was stored at 25oC and the last sample was stored at 40oC. The physical appearance (separation, homogeneity, odor, color and pH) of the samples was observed and recorded each week for one month.
Rheological Testing
The viscosity and rheological behavior of the prepared creams were determined using a cone and plate viscometer (Anton Paar, Rheometer Germany GmbH, Model MCR 101). All measurements were carried out at a temperature of 25 ± 1°C, using spindle CP 35. The formulations were loaded on the plate at an amount of 0.5 g and allowed to reach the stable temperature for 5 min. To assure accuracy, the rheometer was calibrated and programmed via a computer controlled RheoCompass software (Anton Paar).
Flow Curve
Flow curves are measured by either controlled shear rate or controlled shear stress and the viscosity function of the samples is shown at a shear range of 0.01–100 1/s with a logarithmic increase and with a decreasing measuring point duration from 30 to 2 s to avoid transient effects.
Temperature Sweep Test
The heating range is set as 14–37°C, the heating rate is 5°C/min, the strain is fixed at 1%, and the oscillation frequency is 1.0 rad/s. All measurements were carried out in triplicate and average values were reported.
Animal model and Experimental Design
Forty-eight female C57/BL6 mice weighing 22±2 g were housed and acclimatized at Laboratory Animal Research Unit of the University of Petra Pharmaceutical Center. Mice were maintained under controlled conditions of temperature (22-24 °C), humidity (55-65%), and photoperiod cycles (12 light/12 h dark) with a standard diet and free access to water. The protocol of the animal testing on mice was reviewed and approved by the Ethical Committee of the University of Petra under the approval number A1/4/2022, University of Petra (Amman, Jordan).
After acclimatization, mice were randomized into 6 groups (n=8) as follows; negative control treated with neither formulas nor exposed to UVA light, control receiving vehicles only, placebo receiving vehicles and exposed to artificial UVA light (mention manufacturer and country), a group receiving Bergaptin (0.002%) as a positive control to depigmentation models, and 2 groups receiving different concentration of the study plant extract (10 and 20 %). On the first day of the study, animals’ hair was shaved off the dorsal region using an electronic trimmer. Thereafter, animals were treated with either vehicle or 4% hydroquinone (HQ) for 15 consecutive days for induction of skin depigmentation “vitiligo model”. On day 9 from the initiation of the study signs of vitiligo were noted, therefore, animals were prepared for hair shaving and were treated with corresponding study treatments. Thereafter, animals were exposed to artificial UVA light every second day and 30 min after the application of treatments. Application of treatments was 2 hours from the application of HQ, and was consistent until the termination of the study (study day 28) while HQ was discontinued after day 15. Mice were observed daily for any signs of irritation, distress, or unusual behavior, and photographed every three days to monitor hair cycle and changes in skin color. On day 28, mice were subjected to a physical examination of the skin and hair nature. Skin biopsies from each group were collected every week for histology, and other samples of skin were collected on day 24 and preserved for further genetic analysis.
Histopathology
Skin biopsies for histology were dissected and kept in 10% formalin and refrigerated at 4°C. Before 24 hours of reading, all samples were submerged in absolute ethanol 70% for 24 hours for dehydration. Specimens were prepared, sectioned and stained with hematotoxin and eosin then slides were compared under a light microscope (Optica B-190).
Skin irritation/corrosive potential test
The safety of M. Sativa on the skin of young albino female rabbits weighing 2250±150g was housed and acclimatized at the Laboratory Animal Research Unit of the University of Petra Pharmaceutical Center. Rabbits were housed and maintained under controlled temperatures (20±3°C), humidity (50±15%), and 12 light/dark cycles with free access to diet and drinking water. All animal studies were conducted following the University of Petra Institutional Guidelines on Animal Use. The protocol of the skin irritation/corrosive test was evaluated and approved by the Ethical Committee of the University of Petra under approval number A4/4/2022, University of Petra (Amman, Jordan).
According to the OECD Guideline for Testing of Chemicals, Guideline 404 for Acute Dermal Irritation/Corrosion, initial and confirmatory studies were conducted. One animal was prepared for the initial testing of the formula. First, fur at the dorsal area of the rabbit trunk was clipped and skin was observed for the next day to assure intact skin. Thereafter, 0.5 mL of both M. Sativa formulations were applied sequentially as three patches to an area of approximately 6 cm2 and covered with a gauze patch, the first patch was left on the skin for 3 min, the second patch for 1 h and the third for 4 h only. Animals were examined immediately after patch removal for signs of erythema and edema, and dermal reactions were scored. Proceeding the initial test, a confirmatory test was conducted on another animal to confirm the response. A patch was applied to previously prepared skin, described earlier, and left for a dermal exposure period of 4 h.
Analysis
Skin and hair depigmentation model
The depigmentation of skin was evaluated using a scoring method (Table 2). Observations included skin color, hair color and growth.
Skin irritation/corrosive model
The dermal response was evaluated according to Draize’s dermal irritation scoring model (Table 3). Scoring was performed immediately at the removal of the patch, after 60 min, 24, 48 and 72h.