Mechanistic insights into Da-Fang-Feng decoction for osteoarthritis: an integrated strategy combining machine learning, molecular docking, and molecular dynamics simulation


Abstract

Background. Osteoarthritis (OA) involves complex inflammatory and oxidative stress mechanisms that require multi-target therapeutic strategies. Da-Fang-Feng Decoction (DFFD), a classical herbal formulation, has shown potential anti-inflammatory and antioxidant activity, but its molecular basis remains unclear.
Methods. A multi-omics strategy combining network pharmacology, machine learning, molecular docking, and molecular dynamics (MD) simulation was used to elucidate the pharmacological mechanism of DFFD against OA. Candidate targets were identified through network analysis and prioritized using multiple machine learning algorithms. Pharmacokinetic evaluation (ADME) was performed for major active components. Key compound–target interactions were validated by molecular docking, MD simulation, and cellular experiments.
Results. Five representative compounds—naringenin, quercetin, kaempferol, baicalein, and wogonin—were identified as bioactive constituents of DFFD. Among 125 overlapping targets, AKT1 and IL1B emerged as critical nodes regulating inflammatory and oxidative pathways. All five compounds exhibited favorable pharmacokinetic characteristics and stable binding to AKT1 and IL1B in both docking and MD analyses. Cellular validation confirmed that DFFD reduced AKT1 and IL1B expression and mitigated reactive oxygen species (ROS) accumulation, demonstrating anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects.
Conclusions. This integrative computational and experimental investigation reveals that DFFD alleviates OA by modulating AKT1/IL1B signaling and oxidative stress. The findings provide mechanistic insight and a scientific foundation for the clinical application of DFFD in OA management.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].