Network Pharmacology and Experimental Approaches Reveal the Effects of Scutellaria barbata Flavonoids Against Alzheimer's Diseasevia CREB Phosphorylation in Rats

Introduction: In this study, we investigated the effects and molecular mechanisms by which Scutellaria barbata flavonoids (SBFs) enhance neurogenesis and ameliorate memory impairment mediated by CREB phosphorylation in rats, using a network pharmacology approach. Methods: The active ingredients of SBFs and their targets were identified using the Traditional Chinese Medicine Systems Pharmacology platform. An Alzheimer’s disease (AD) model was established by intracerebroventricular injection of Aβ25-35 combined with AlCl₃ and RHTGF-β1 (composited Aβ) in rats. The Morris water maze was used to confirm the successful establishment of the AD rat model. Successfully modeled rats were randomly divided into three groups: a model group and two treatment groups receiving either 140 mg/kg SBFs or 0.5 mg/kg Rolipram (positive control). After 38 days, the Morris water maze test was performed to assess learning and memory abilities. Hematoxylin–eosin (HE) staining, immunohistochemistry, quantitative PCR (qPCR), and Western blotting (WB) were conducted to evaluate neuronal morphology, NeuN protein expression, the mRNA levels of TrkB, RSK, CREB, and BDNF, and the protein expression of NeuN, TrkB, RSK, P-CREB-Ser133, and BDNF in the hippocampus and cerebral cortex of the rats. Discussion: These results indicate that SBFs and Rolipram ameliorate learning and memory impairment, reduce neuropathological changes, promote neurogenesis, and upregulate the BDNF– RSK–CREB signaling pathway through the activation of CREB phosphorylation. The findings suggest that the effects of SBFs are similar to those of Rolipram and that SBFs may also act as activators of CREB phosphorylation. Overall, SBFs promote neurogenesis and improve learning and memory deficits, possibly by enhancing CREB phosphorylation. This study identified the key targets and signaling pathways of SBFs in AD, indicating that SBFs represent a promising multitarget therapeutic candidate for the treatment of AD. However, our research has some limitations. Further studies are needed to determine the absorption route, major active components, and metabolic forms of the bioactive substances in SBFs. In future work, we aim to clarify the potential mechanisms of SBFs in AD by integrating multiple omics approaches and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of SBFs in AD treatment. Results: Thirty-seven targets were identified based on the intersection between AD-related targets and the components of SBFs. SBFs were involved in anti-AD activity through the MAPK signaling pathway, including the BDNF–RSK–CREB pathway. SBFs attenuated memory impairment, ameliorated neuropathological changes, increased NeuN protein expression, and regulated the mRNA expression of TrkB, RSK, CREB, and BDNF, as well as the protein expression of NeuN, TrkB, RSK, P-CREB-Ser133, and BDNF. Rolipram produced similar effects to SBFs. Conclusion: Network pharmacology analysis and animal experiments confirmed that SBFs promote neurogenesis and ameliorate learning and memory impairment in AD model rats, primarily by facilitating CREB phosphorylation, similar to Rolipram. This study indicates that SBFs may be a promising therapeutic candidate for the treatment of AD.