Antifungal and cytotoxicity activities of Banisteriopsis argyrophylla leaves Daiane M. Oliveira a , Tom as F. R. Silva a ,M ario M. Martins a ,S ergio A. L. de Morais a , Roberto Chang a , Francisco J. T. de Aquino a , Claudio V. da Silva b , Thaise L. Teixeira b , Carlos H. G. Martins c , Tha  ıs S. Moraes c , Lu  ıs C. S. Cunha d , Marcos Pivatto a and Alberto de Oliveira a a Nucleus of Research in Natural Products (NuPPeN), Institute of Chemistry, b Trypanosomatids Laboratory (LATRI), Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Federal University of Uberl^ andia, Uberl^ andia, c Nucleus of Research in Sciences and Technology, Laboratory of Research in Applied Microbiology (LaPeMA), University of Franca, Franca and d Bioprospecting Center for Natural Products (NuBiProN), Chemistry Department, Federal Institute of Tri^ angulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Brazil Keywords antifungal; Banisteriopsis argyrophylla; Cerrado; cytotoxicity; flavonoids Correspondence Alberto de Oliveira, Nucleus of Research in Natural Products (NuPPeN), Institute of Chemistry, Federal University of Uberl^ andia, Uberl^ andia, MG 38400-902, Brazil. E-mail: alberto@ufu.br Received April 11, 2018 Accepted July 21, 2018 doi: 10.1111/jphp.12996 Abstract Objectives This work aimed to evaluate the antifungal and cytotoxic activity of the EtOH extract and fractions of Banisteriopsis argyrophylla leaves, and to per- form the identification of these bioactive metabolites. Methods The EtOAc fraction (EAF) obtained from the ethanolic extract of B. argyrophylla leaves showed better antifungal potential against Candida spp. In this fraction, ten flavonoids have been identified by UHPLC-ESI-MS n . Then, EAF was submitted to column chromatography to give four new fractions (A1–A4). The cytotoxicity was determined against Vero cells. Key findings The EAF showed better antifungal potential against Candida spp. with minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) between 31.25 and 93.75 lg/ml. The (–)-catechin (fraction A1) showed a MIC of 2.83 lg/ml against Candida glabrata. Fractions A2, A3 and A4 were rich in quercetins and kaempfer- ols and showed good inhibitory concentrations (5.86–46.87 lg/ml) against C. al- bicans, C. glabrata and C. tropicalis. Conclusions The EtOH extract, fractions and the isolated (–)-catechin showed lower toxicity to Vero cells than cisplatin, used as a positive control. Thus, the leaves of B. argyrophylla are a promising source of antifungal agents. Introduction The occurrence of infections caused by Candida species has recently risen significantly. Candida albicans is the main aetiological agent of candidiasis in humans; however, other species of Candida, such as C. tropicalis and C. glabrata, are considered pathogenic in humans. [1–3] The fungi of the genus Candida are part of the normal microbiota in the organism and are present on the surface of mucous mem- branes such as the oral cavity, skin and genitals. However, when there is an imbalance of this microbiota, various infectious diseases may arise, such as candidiasis and yeast invasion in the bloodstream (candidaemia). [4] These yeasts are emerging in hospitals, contributing mainly to the mor- tality of immunocompromised patients. [5–7] A study of 13 796 patients in 1265 intensive care units in 75 countries in Europe, America, Asia and Oceania found that 51% of patients were infected with microorganisms and 16% of these received treatment against fungal infec- tions. [8] In addition to humans, animals and plants also suffer fungal attack. The treatment of animals is more diffi- cult than plants, although these infections have posed sig- nificant losses in agribusiness. [9,10] In this context, only two synthetic antifungal compounds were approved (efinacona- zole and tavaborole) between 2011 and 2014. In fact, mod- ern forms of treatment still use agents such as amphotericin and griseofulvin, which were launched in 1958. [11] In addi- tion to the dependency on a few drugs for the treatment of fungal infections, there are also problems associated with side effects and microbial resistance compared with © 2018 Royal Pharmaceutical Society, Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 70 (2018), pp. 1541–1552 1541 Research Paper Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jpp/article/70/11/1541/6121718 by guest on 13 June 2022