Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity

Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity / 2019 / Article

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2019 |Article ID 6587150 | 52 pages | https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6587150

Active Essential Oils and Their Components in Use against Neglected Diseases and Arboviruses

Academic Editor: Ryoji Nagai
Received26 Jun 2018
Accepted06 Nov 2018
Published07 Feb 2019

Abstract

The term neglected diseases refers to a group of infections caused by various classes of pathogens, including protozoa, viruses, bacteria, and helminths, most often affecting impoverished populations without adequate sanitation living in close contact with infectious vectors and domestic animals. The fact that these diseases were historically not considered priorities for pharmaceutical companies made the available treatments options obsolete, precarious, outdated, and in some cases nonexistent. The use of plants for medicinal, religious, and cosmetic purposes has a history dating back to the emergence of humanity. One of the principal fractions of chemical substances found in plants are essential oils (EOs). EOs consist of a mixture of volatile and hydrophobic secondary metabolites with marked odors, composed primarily of terpenes and phenylpropanoids. They have great commercial value and were widely used in traditional medicine, by phytotherapy practitioners, and in public health services for the treatment of several conditions, including neglected diseases. In addition to the recognized cytoprotective and antioxidative activities of many of these compounds, larvicidal, insecticidal, and antiparasitic activities have been associated with the induction of oxidative stress in parasites, increasing levels of nitric oxide in the infected host, reducing parasite resistance to reactive oxygen species, and increasing lipid peroxidation, ultimately leading to serious damage to cell membranes. The hydrophobicity of these compounds also allows them to cross the membranes of parasites as well as the blood-brain barrier, collaborating in combat at the second stage of several of these infections. Based on these considerations, the aim of this review was to present an update of the potential of EOs, their fractions, and their chemical constituents, against some neglected diseases, including American and African trypanosomiasis, leishmaniasis, and arboviruses, specially dengue.

1. Introduction

Neglected diseases (ND) are a group of infections caused by various classes of infectious and parasitic pathogens, including protozoa, viruses, bacteria, and helminths. They most often affect low-income populations, with higher prevalence in tropical and subtropical countries. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), they are a set of 17 diseases, including leishmaniasis, African and American trypanosomiasis, leprosy, tuberculosis, leptospirosis, onchocerciasis, and schistosomiasis, affecting more than one billion people around the world and considered a threat to public health in 149 countries [1, 2].

The fact that these diseases are not considered priorities by large medical and pharmaceutical companies results in low investment in research and development of new drugs, causing the few available treatment options to become obsolete, precarious, outdated, and even in some cases nonexistent [3].

These diseases are known for the lack of attention paid to them by political, social, and health entities. The worsening of social and health conditions in a great part of the world’s population has accelerated in recent years according to studies providing data regarding current social policies [46].

According to some studies in Latin American countries, Brazil has the highest rate of neglected diseases, and a large part of the Brazilian population both above and below the poverty line suffers from some of these diseases [79].

Several neglected diseases are arboviruses, that is, viral diseases transmitted through the saliva of contaminated arthropods [10]. Thus, they spread with worrisome epidemiological speed because of human exposure to the insect vectors [11, 12]. In some cases, a single vector can transmit more than one disease, as is the case of the vector Aedes aegypti that may transmit dengue, Zika, and chikungunya.

According to some authors [13, 14], 80% of the Brazilian population lives in urban areas. Demographic expansion and climatic conditions create an attractive environment for the reproduction of arbovirus vectors, rapidly affecting a large part of the population living in these urban centers [13]. Due to the absence of many natural predators, disease-bearing arthropods reproduce more easily in urban centers.

The use of plants for medicinal, religious, and cosmetic purposes dates back to the emergence of humanity. This historical interest promoted the development of several areas of inquiry invested in understanding and unraveling the potential of substances produced by plants as a result of their adaptive evolution [15, 16].

One of the principal fractions of chemical substances found in plants are essential oils (EOs). EOs consist primarily of a mixture of volatile hydrophobic secondary metabolites with marked odors and great commercial value; EOs may be thought of as fingerprints of the plants where they are found [17, 18]. They include aromatic alcohols, acids, esters, phenolics, ketones, aldehydes, and hydrocarbons. In plants, EOs act as protective agents against predators and attractants for pollinators [19, 20].

The main chemical compounds found in EOs are terpenoids and phenylpropanoids [21, 22] that are widely used as bioactive molecules in biology, agronomy, medicine, and pharmaceutical sciences. Among the medical-pharmaceutical activities of these compounds are antitumor, antihelmintic, and larvicidal [2325] and insecticidal [2632] activities, as well as activity against arbovirus vectors [33, 34].

Despite the recognized cytoprotective and antioxidative activities of these compounds, in many cases larvicidal, insecticidal, and antiparasitic activities are associated with the induction of oxidative stress in the parasite, increasing the level of nitric oxide production by the infected host, reducing parasite resistance to reactive oxygen species, and generating high levels of free radicals and increasing lipid peroxidation, ultimately leading to serious damage to cell membranes and the killing of parasites [3540].

Based on these considerations, in this review an update of the potential of EOs, their fractions, and their components that are active against some neglected diseases, including American and African trypanosomiasis, leishmaniasis, and arboviruses, specially dengue is presented.

To compose the database, the authors did a systematical search in the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, SciELO, Cochrane Library, and NAPRALERT. The following search terms were combined and screened: essential oils, name of the neglected disease, and/or the parasite name. No language restrictions were applied. The period considered was the last 10 years, without however disregarding some articles of revision, and some classical literatures were considered important.

1.1. Essentials Oils Active against Trypanosoma cruzi

Chagas disease (CD), also known as American trypanosomiasis, is a potentially life-threatening disease caused by the protozoan Trypanosoma cruzi [41]. According to the World Health Organization, CD affects about 7 million people worldwide and is endemic in 21 Latin American countries. It is estimated that CD leads to more than 7000 deaths per year and there are about 25 million people at risk for infection. Transmission to humans usually occurs through the excrement of infected vector insects (haematophagous triatomines) that normally become active at night, feeding on mammalian blood by biting exposed skin and defecating close to the bite. Transmission can also occur through transfusion of infected blood, congenital transmission, and (less frequently) organ transplantation or laboratory accidents [42].

Although it is an infectious disease with more than 100 years since its discovery, the morbidity and mortality associated with CD remains high. This may be attributed to several factors, including the absence of effective vaccines and/or medical treatments. Currently, only two drugs are available for CD treatment: benznidazole (BZ) and nifurtimox (NFX). Unfortunately, these drugs carry high toxicity and cause severe side effects that often interrupt treatment [43]. Therefore, there is a need for new therapeutic alternatives for CD that are more effective and less toxic for both acute and chronic phases.

Therefore, the use of natural products is an important strategy to identify new trypanocidal compounds, and the literature already described promising studies with the use of EOs, found in some species of plants in many tropical countries [44].

Over the last two decades, the trypanocidal activity of approximately 400 plant species has been analyzed; however, few reports have assessed the trypanocidal activity of EOs [45, 46].

The literature described that EOs have been used since the Middle Ages by Arabs for their antiseptic, bactericidal, virucidal, and fungicidal properties. They are also used for embalming and preservation of foods and as drugs with antimicrobial, analgesic, sedative, anti-inflammatory, spasmolytic, and local anesthesic properties [47]. However, little was known about their antiparasitic applications, with the first reports appearing only at the end of the 20th century and beginning of the 21st century. Chagas disease was no different, and only in recent decades has there been an increase in the number of publications describing the use of EOs and/or their constituents with inhibitory activity against trypanosomatid protozoa [4850].

Holetz and coworkers produced one of the first reports of the effects of the essential oil of Ocimum gratissimum on Herpetomonas samuelpessoai, a nonpathogenic trypanosomatid that shares important antigens with T. cruzi and can be easily cultured. This trypanosomatid also induced humoral and cell-mediated immune responses, showing itself to be a good model for study of the biology of trypanosomatids and a suitable model for screening new trypanocidal drugs. The EO of Ocimum gratissimum inhibited protozoal growth in a dose-dependent manner with values between 100 and 91 μg/mL, at concentrations from 20 to 250 μg/mL [51, 52].

In 2006, Santoro and colleagues investigated the effects of EOs from Origanum vulgare and Thymus vulgaris on growth and ultrastructure of evolutionary forms of T. cruzi. EO from oregano showed an /24 h value of 175 μg/mL against epimastigotes and induced trypomastigote lysis with /24 h of 115 μg/mL. Thyme EO presented an /24 h of 77 μg/mL for epimastigotes and 38 μg/mL for trypomastigotes. Thymol (1) (Figure 1), the primary constituent of thyme, was also tested and showed an /24 h value of 62 μg/mL for epimastigotes and an /24 h value of 53 μg/mL for trypomastigotes. These /24 h results were similar to those obtained after treatment in vitro of the parasites with the reference drug benznidazole (BZ) (/24 h approximately 50 μg/mL) [53].

In another study, the Santoro group evaluated the EOs of three species, clove (Syzygium aromaticum L.), basil (Ocimum basilicum L.), and yarrow (Achillea millefolium L.) and some of their primary constituents (eugenol (2) and linalool (3)) (Figure 2). Treatment with EOs and their constituents showed that they inhibited T. cruzi growth, with clove EO being the most effective. Its /24 h value was 99.5 μg/mL for epimastigotes and 57.5 μg/mL for trypomastigotes. Incubation of T. cruzi with eugenol (2) (the main constituent of clove) gave an /24 h value of 246 μg/mL for epimastigotes and 76 μg/mL for trypomastigotes. This suggested that the chemical constituents of clove EO had a synergistic effect that increased trypanocidal activity. Linalool (3) (the primary constituent of basil) was also tested and gave /24 h values of 162.5 μg/mL for epimastigotes and 264 μg/mL for trypomastigotes. Chamazulene (4) (Figure 2), one of the primary constituents of yarrow EO, was not evaluated in their study [54].

Menna-Barreto and coworkers evaluated the potential trypanocidal effect of the oleaginous ethanolic extract of Pterodon pubescens seeds, its fractions, and geranylgeraniol, among other components isolated from the hexane fraction. The ethanolic extract was fractionated, yielding three subfractions including geranylgeraniol (5) (Figure 3). The EO of P. pubescens, its fractions, and geranylgeranyl induced dose-dependent lysis in T. cruzi trypomastigotes. Geranylgeraniol (5) was the most active compound, with an /24 h value of 15.3 μg/mL [55].

Escobar and coworkers evaluated the antiprotozoal activities of Colombian Lippia spp. EO and their major components. Nineteen EO samples were extracted from the aerial parts of five different species by microwave radiation-assisted hydrodistillation and were characterized by GC-FID and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Geraniol (6), neral (7), limonene (8), nerol (9), carvacrol (10), p-cymene (11), γ-terpenes (12), carvone (13), and thymol (1) were major components identified. Nine oils were active against epimastigotes from T. cruzi with values in the range of 5.5 to 32.2 μg/mL. Six EOs were active against amastigotes interiorized in Vero cells with ranging from 12.2 to 53.0 μg/mL. In addition, the authors evaluated seven of the major EO components, including thymol (1), carvacrol (10), geranial, and p-cymene (11) (Figure 4) which were active against epimastigotes, with values ranging from 0.3 to 28.1 μg/mL. Thymol (1) and S-carvone (13) were the most active against intracellular amastigote-infected Vero cells, with values of 3.6 and 6.0 μg/mL, respectively [56].

In a study by Rojas and coworkers, the authors evaluated the in vitro activity of EOS from 10 plants against T. cruzi, their cytotoxic activities, and their modulatory activities in a nitric oxide assay. The evaluated plants were Mentha piperita L. (mentha), Rosmarinus officinalis L (romero), Chenopodium ambrosioides L. (paico), Eucalyptus globulus Labill (eucalipto), Artemisia absinthium L. (ajenjo), Melissa officinalis L (toronjil), Minthostachys setosa Brig (muña), Cymbopogon citratus (hierba luisa), Aloysia triphylla (cedrón), and Mentha spicata L. (hierba buena). Of these, EOs from Cymbopogon citratus and Aloysia triphylla were the most active against epimastigote forms, inhibiting T. cruzi growth with values of 63.09 and 96.49 μg/mL, respectively. There was no significant variation in the concentration of nitric oxide, and no cytotoxicity was evident [57].

Rojas and colleagues also evaluated the in vivo anti-T. cruzi effects of Cymbopogon citratus and Aloysia triphylla EOs in Balb/c mice. C. citratus EO administered at 250 mg/kg/day reduced parasitemia peaks from 113.92 ± 25.66 to 74.60 ± 12.37 trypomastigotes/mL. Reduction in the number of amastigotes and number of inflammatory infiltrates in the heart was also observed. When administered at 100 mg/kg/day, no reduction in the number of trypomastigotes was observed (77.40 ± 14.93 trypomastigotes/mL) [58]. Aloysia triphylla EO produced significant reduction in parasitemia (85.4%) with a peak of 250 mg/kg/day. They also observed a reduction in the number of amastigotes and inflammatory infiltrates in the heart [59].

Santos et al. evaluated Piper malacophyllum EO against diverse microorganisms including T. cruzi. Among the 28 compounds identified in the EO, (+) camphor (14) was the major constituent (32.8%) followed by camphene (15) (17.8%) (Figure 5). P. malacophyllum EO showed activity against epimastigote forms of T. cruzi with an value of 311.82 μg/mL. This was considered a low activity value compared to that of other EOs described in the literature [60].

EOs from Lippia sidoides, Lippia origanoides, Chenopodium ambrosioides, Ocimum gratissimum, Justicia pectoralis, and Vitex agnus-castus were tested against T. cruzi by Borges and coworkers. All EOs inhibited epimastigote growth and reduced cell viability of trypomastigote forms in a dose-dependent manner. C. ambroside (main constituent – terpinolene (16) (69.9%)), L. origanoides (main constituent – carvacrol (10) (37.3%)), and L. sidoides (main constituent – thymol (1) (78.4%)) (Figures 1, 4, and 6) were the most effective against epimastigote forms ( values of 21.3, 26.2, and 28.9 μg/mL, respectively). The less active were EOs obtained from J. pectorales, O. gratissimum, and V. agnus-castus with values of 56.8, 71.1, and 157.1 μg/mL, respectively. On the other hand, L. sidoides, O. gratissimum (38.4% – eugenol (2) as the main constituent), C. ambrosioides, and L. origanoides were found to be more effective against trypomastigotes with LC50/24 h values of 10.3, 11.5, 28.1, and 39.7 μg/mL, respectively [61].

Esperandim et al. investigated the activity in vitro of the Piper cubeba EO against trypomastigote and amastigote forms of T. cruzi and promastigote forms of Leishmania amazonensis. GC-MS analysis of the essential oils demonstrated than the main components were sabinene (17) (19.99%), eucalyptol (18) (11.87%), γ-terpineol (19) (6.36%), α-pinene (20) (5.82%), and camphor (14) (5.61%) (Figure 7). The in vitro activity against trypomastigotes and amastigotes of T. cruzi increased with increasing concentrations, giving values of 45.5 and 87.9 μg/mL, respectively. The EO was not active against L. amazonensis [62].

In 2014, Azeredo and coworkers evaluated the in vitro antitrypanocidal activity of eight different EOs (Cinnamomum verum, Citrus limon, Cymbopogon nardus, Corymbia citriodora, Eucalyptus globulus, Eugenia uniflora, Myrocarpus frondosus, and Rosmarinus officinalis) against T. cruzi. Of these, Cinnamomum verum EO was the most effective against T. cruzi epimastigotes (), followed by Myrocarpus frondosus () and Eugenia uniflora (). No other evaluated EOs presented significant activity. In addition, C. verum EO showed /24 h values of 5.05 μg/mL and 20 μg/mL against T. cruzi metacyclic trypomastigotes and intracellular amastigotes, respectively. GC-MS analysis of C. verum EO showed (E)-cinnamaldehyde (21) (81.52%) (Figure 8) and eugenol (2) (16.68%) as the main components [63].

Monzote and colleagues evaluated the Chenopodium ambrosioides EOs and their principal components against Leishmania infantum, Plasmodium falciparum, Trypanosoma brucei, and T. cruzi. C. ambrosioides EO showed activity against evaluated protozoa, with values ranging between 0.2 and 6.4 μg/mL. Against T. cruzi, the value was 1.9 μg/mL [64].

In 2015, Andrade et al. evaluated the trypanocidal activity of EOs from Cinnamodendron dinisii Schwacke (canellaceae) and Siparuna guianensis Aublet (Siparunaceae). Both EOs showed low trypanocidal activity, with /24 h values of 209.30 μg/mL for S. guianensis and 282.93 μg/mL for C. dinisii. The /24 h of the reference drug benznidazol was 12.8 μg/mL [65].

The EO from Latana camara leaves was tested against Leishmania braziliensis and T. cruzi by Barros and coworkers. They found that L. camara EO was more effective against L. braziliensis than T. cruzi with IC50 values of 72.31 and 201.94 μg/mL to promastigote and epimastigote forms, respectively. The authors also evaluated the composition of this EO by CG-MS and found that the main constituents were (E)-caryophyllene (22) (23.75%), bicyclogermacrene (23) (15.80%), and germacrene D (24) (11.73%) (Figure 9) [66, 67].

In 2016, a review published by Barros de Alencar and coworkers summarized many reports that identified the activity of diterpenes against NDs, including Chagas disease. The compounds and classes of compounds that were identified as most promising were abietic acid (25) derivatives, with values between <20 μM and > 150 μM (Olmo et al., 2015); 12-hydroxy-11,14-diketo-6,8,12-abietatrien-19,20-olide (26) isolated from Salvia cuspidate with value of 5 μg/mL (Lozano et al., 2015); 5-epi-icetexone (27) (10 mg/kg/day, i.p.) used for 5 days, capable of reversing infection in Swiss mice (Lozano et al., 2016); and aphidicolin (28) derivatives obtained by semisynthesis exhibited high potency and selectivity against parasitic amastigote forms (Santos et al., 2016). Two of these derivatives gave values of 0.6 μM (28 A) and 0.78 μM (28 B), with selectivity for both (Figure 10) [68, 69].

Other semisynthetic compounds were evaluated by Varela and colleagues. The EO obtained from the areal parts (leaves) of Piper malacophylum (Piperaceae) presented two alkenyphenol derivatives as primary compounds: gibbilimbols A (29) and B (30), evaluated against promastigote/amastigote forms of Leishmania infantum and trypomastigote/amastigote forms of T. cruzi. Gibbilimbol B (30) showed better trypanocidal activity and lower toxicity to mammalian cells. These results encouraged researchers to prepare several quite simple synthetic analogues. Among these, the compound n-octyl-4-hydrozybenzylamine (LINS03003) (31) was the most potent, with values of 5.5 μM against amastigote forms of T. cruzi, with a higher activity than that of the natural prototype (Figure 11) [70].

Spurred on by the previous results, Varela’s group isolated a new natural product from the P. malacophylum EO — compound 5-[(3E)-oct-3-en-1-il]-1,3-benzodioxole (32) (Figure 12), and a new set of five compounds were synthesized. The isolated compound was evaluated against L. infantum and T. cruzi and presented potential against promastigote/trypomastigote/amastigote forms of T. cruzi, with values of 32–83 μM and low toxicity ( to mammalian cells). The synthetic compounds possessed promising antiparasitic activity; however, the compounds were considered to be cytotoxic. Compound LINS03011 (33) (Figure 12) was the most active compound with values of 13.3 mM against amastigotes, comparable to the phenolic prototype LINS03003 (31), but with better selectivity index () and less toxicity [71].

Souza and coworkers evaluated the chemical composition and the in vitro effects of the EOs from the leaves of Eugenia brejoensis (EbEO), Hyptis pectinata (HpEO), Hypenia salzmannii (HsEO), Lippia macrophylla (LmEO), and seeds of Syagrus coronata (ScEO) against T. cruzi. GC-MS allowed the identification of 114 of 162 compounds. Among these, hydrocarbon sesquiterpenes were the most abundant found in EbEO (94.51%), HfEO (69.84%), HpEO (77.88), and HsEO (56.16%). The LmEO fraction had monoterpenes as its principal constituents (98.08%). The EOs presented values between 29 and 110.6 mg/mL for epimastigote forms, 17.39–182.49 mg/mL for trypomastigote forms, and 12.5–408.33 mg/mL for amastigote forms of T. cruzi. The most active was EbEO, and the least active was ScEO. EbEO had as its main constituents δ-cadinene (34) (15.88%), trans-caryophyllene (22) (9.77%), and α-muurolol (35) (9.42%) (Figure 13) [72].

Villamizar et al. analyzed the trypanocidal effects of Piper aduncum EO (PaEO) and its main constituents against various forms of T. cruzi. GC-MS identified nerolidol and linalool (3) as the major PaEO components. PaEO showed against metacyclic trypomastigotes and /24 h values of 9 μg/mL against amastigotes forms. Among the two main constituents isolated and identified, linalool (3) (Figure 2) was the best, showing trypanocidal activity with an /24 h value of 306 ng/mL [73].

A recent study by Junior and colleagues evaluated the efficacy of the EO of Syzygium aromaticum (SaEO) administrated orally, alone, and in combination with benznidazole (BZ) in mice infected with T. cruzi IV strain. GC-MS analysis identified eugenol (2) (82.2%) and γ-caryophyllene (36) (13.0%) (Figure 14) as the main components of SaEO. Treatment with SaEO promoted reduction in 1/5 parameters derived from the parasitemia curve when compared with untreated control groups. The groups treated with BZ and BZ + SaEO had reductions in 4/5 of these parameters, with similar profiles of the parasitemia curve. In addition, the animals treated with BZ and BZ + SaEO presented lower patency periods compared with animals treated only with SaEO, as well as lower positivity of blood cultures compared with the untreated control group. With respect to cure rates, SaEO showed 12.5% (1/8), BZ showed 25.0% (1/4), and BZ + SaEO showed 37.5% (3/8), considered a very interesting result [43].

1.2. Essential Oils and Components with Anti-Trypanosoma brucei Activity

Trypanosoma brucei (Trypanosomatid family) is the principal protozoan responsible for causing the type of trypanosomiasis known as sleeping sickness (or human African trypanosomiasis). It is classified as a neglected disease and is transmitted by tsetse flies (Glossina spp., Diptera: Glossinidae).

In humans, this infection is caused by two subspecies of T. brucei (T. brucei gambiense, predominant in the West Africa, and T. brucei rhodesiense, predominant in the East Africa). There is also T. brucei brucei that is infective only in animals. It is endemic to Sub-Saharan Africa. Despite the fact that it has been declining over the last two decades, T. brucei nevertheless affects approximately 30,000 people annually (as well as about 60 million people - distributed in 36 countries - that inhabit areas at risk), with high mortality rates, mainly in rural populations that have little access to necessary treatments, causing substantial socioeconomic impact [7486].

Human African trypanosomiasis, after parasite inoculations in the human host (or animal, mutatis mutandis), evolves in two stages. The primary stage is a hemolymphatic phase, or the parasitic cell replication stage, followed by a secondary meningoencephalitic phase, in which the parasites cross the blood-brain barrier and invade the central nervous system [86, 87]. This stage of the disease is characterized by a symptomatology including fever, headache, swelling of the lymph nodes, skin rashes, splenomegaly, confusion, sensory disturbances, motor coordination deficiency, and sleep disturbances (characteristic of the disease). It can be fatal if not properly treated [88].

The primary treatment is chemotherapy [8991]; however, only four drugs are approved for human use: suramin, pentamidine, melarsoprol, and eflornithine [92]. The former two alternatives are used in the first stage of the disease, while the later two are used only in the last stage, representing alternatives of increased toxicity of the treatment [46, 8892]. However, as was observed for the treatment of the other NDs, the treatment of T. brucei includes only a few effective drugs, and those that exist carry substantial toxicities, high costs, absence of sustainable production, and development of resistance by the protozoa [9397]. There is an urgent need for the discovery and development of new drugs that are more efficient and secure. This need is reflected in the growing interest of many research groups in the search for new compounds with anti-T. brucei potential [98106].

In many cases, traditional medicine has been the only alternative available for treatments based on natural plant products, and the treatment of T. brucei infections is no exception [64, 104, 107114]. Natural plant products are excellent sources of safe and effective compounds to combat human African trypanosomiasis [88, 107, 115]. These natural bioactive products are for the most part plant secondary metabolites, including several classes of promising bioactive compounds, among which are EOs [92, 116118].

As a reflection of the increasing interest in EOs for use against T. brucei evaluation, a number of investigators have studied their potential, from determination of vegetal sources in various plant parts (aerial or radicular systems) to acquisition of species and types of essential oils.

In parallel with the increase in the use of EOs obtained from various parts of plants (aerial parts, fruits, flowers, and/or root systems) to combat sleeping sickness, several investigators worldwide have expanded their studies into the potential of these EOs and their main constituent chemicals against T. brucei.

One of these studies (Monzote and colleagues [64]) evaluated the EO from Chenopodium ambrosioides L. (CaEO), an aromatic plant with known biological potential from the Americas and Africa [119]. The plant’s anti-Leishmania sp. activities have already been identified [120]. The main CaEO components carvacrol (10) (62%), ascaridole (37) (22%), and caryophyllene oxide (38) (5%) (Figure 15) demonstrated substantial growth inhibition of T. brucei parasites (), with activity comparable to that of the standard drug suramin ( of 0.05 ± 0.05 μg/mL). These results, demonstrating the broad antiprotozoal spectra of CaEO, are an example of the potential of their use in endemic areas where more than one infectious species is present.

EOs from Cymbopogon species have aroused interest of many research groups because of their antitrypanosomal activities, as the example of their growth inhibitory activity against T. brucei [121, 122]. Kpoviessi et al. [122] evaluated the EOs of fresh leaves from four Cymbopogon species consisting primarily of monoterpenes and sesquiterpenes (C. citrates – with 29 compounds, C. giganteus – with 53 compounds, C. nardus – with 28 compounds, and C. schoenantus – with 41 compounds). The principal identified constituents were as follows: from C. citrates: geranial (6), neral (7), β-pinene (39), cis-geraniol (or nerol) (9), cis-verbenol (40), and geranyl acetate (41); from C. giganteus: trans-p-mentha-1(7),8-dien-2-ol (42), trans-carveol (43), trans-p-mentha-2,8-dienol (44), cis-p-mentha-2,8-dienol (45), cis-p-mentha-1(7),8-dien-2-ol (46), limonene (8), cis-carveol (47), cis-carvone (48), 4,4-dimethylandrost-5-en-3-one (49) and trans-carene-4,5-epoxy (50); from C. nardus: β-citronellol (51), elemol (52), limonene (8), α-cadinol (53), β-elemene (54), cubenol (55), germacrene-D (24), geranyl acetate (41), δ-cadinene (34), and δ-cadinol (56); and from C. schoenantus: piperitone (57), (+)-2-carene (58), limonene (8), elemol (52), β-eudesmol (59), trans-p-mentha-2,8-dienol (44), cis-p-mentha-2,8-dienol (45), and τ-eudesmol (60) (Figure 16).

These authors measured the cytotoxicity against WI38 and CHO cells and in vitro activity against T. brucei. All EOs evaluated were active, with values of 5.71 ± 1.40 μg/mL for C. nardus, 2.10 ± 0.89 μg/mL for C. schoenantus, 1.83 ± 0.13 μg/mL for C. citrates, and 0.25 ± 0.11 μg/mL for C. giganteus. The reference drug suramin had an of 0.11 ± 0.02 μg/mL. C. giganteus EO was the most active oil and demonstrated the largest selectivity index (SI of >200, as well as SI of 21.73 for C. citrates, 8.75 for C. nardus, and 23.81 for C. schoenantus). The anti-T. brucei evaluation of some of the components from these EOs demonstrated high potentialities: β-myrcene (62) (), citronellal (63) (), R(+)-limonene (8) (), citral (64) (), and β-citronellol (51) () (Figure 16). Of these, limonene (8) was the principal component of three of the four EOs, including C. giganteus (the most active), probably tightly influencing their antitrypanosomal activities.

The composition of essential oils of C. giganteus was highly rich in oxygenated monoterpenes that should greatly contribute their potential against T. brucei. The results showed that these compounds should be analyzed separately with greater depth in order to identify new alternatives for the treatment of human African trypanosomiasis.

Kpoviessi et al. [123] analyzed the EOs from the aerial parts (seeds, leaves, and stems) of Ocimum gratissimum in various vegetative stages. Their analysis of the principal EO components from O. gratissimum revealed 47 constituents (the majority of them hydrocarbons and a minority of oxygenated compounds). Of these, p-cymene (11), thymol (1), γ-terpinene (64), β-myrcene (61), and α-thujene (65) (Figure 17) were the most abundant. O. gratissimum EO demonstrated moderate anti-T. brucei activity ( of 27.23 ± 3.74 μg/mL), as also previously observed with many of their principal compounds [94] as observed with thymol (1) ( of 22.86 μg/mL) and p-cymene (11) ( of 76.32 μg/mL). Thus, the primary isolated components did not possess strong anti-T. brucei activity and did not act synergistically (demonstrating an interesting selectivity index of 410 for the leaves and seeds portions). Conversely, the ethanolic extract of O. gratissimum demonstrated values less than 15 μg/mL, leading us to believe that other bioactive compounds that were not present in the EO were responsible for the anti-T. brucei activity, justifying its continued use in traditional medicine.

Nibret and Wink [94] evaluated anti-T. brucei activity and cytotoxicity against human leukemic cells HL-60 in several plants with biological potentialities well-known in traditional Ethiopian medicine, including Hagenia abyssinica (female flower), Leonotis ocymifolia (aerial parts), and Moringa stenopetala (seeds). The results were compared to those of the standard drug diminazene aceturate ( and ). CG-MS revealed 20 components of H. abyssinica (including ledol (66), valeranone (67), palustrol (68), E-15-heptadecenal (69), α-phellandren-8-ol (70), and verbenol (40) as primary compounds) and 68 components for L. ocymifolia (including caryophyllene oxide (38), palmitic acid (71), carotol (72), camphor (14), hexahydrofarnesyl acetone (73), estragole (74), and linalool (3) as the primary compounds) and for M. stenopetala, including benzyl isothiocyanate (75) and isobutyl isothiocyanate (76) as primary compounds. M. stenopetala EO demonstrated greater antitrypanosomal activity ( of 5.03 μg/mL), but with a lower selectivity index (). Among the isolated compounds, the best results were observed with benzyl isothiocyanate (75) ( and ), cinnamaldehyde (21) ( and ), styrene oxide (78) ( and ), and (−)-α-cedrene (79) ( and ). Cinnamaldehyde (21) and styrene oxide (78) (Figure 18) were the compounds with the best combined results ( and SI). Nevertheless, they observed that benzyl isothiocyanate (75) was the majority component of M. stenopetala EO and was therefore responsible for the anti-T. brucei potentiality of this plant. Despite a low selectivity index, the compound can be utilized as a basis for developing new antitrypanosomial drugs.

Keetia leucantha, a plant used in traditional medicine of West African countries, was the object of study of Bero and colleagues [124]. They investigated the chemical composition of KlOE and their anti-T. brucei activities. The plant is used empirically in the treatment of sleeping sickness [102]. K. leucantha EO demonstrated values of 20.9 ± 12.6 μg/mL for bloodstream forms of T. brucei brucei (compared to for the standard drug suramin). Analysis of the secondary metabolites contained in the OE returned 42 components, including n-hexadecanoic acid (43.46%) (80), oleic acid (9.51%) (81), phytol (5.68%) (82), tetradecanoic acid (83) (5.19%), and phytone (84) (4.3%) (Figure 19). Some of these compounds were also evaluated and presented moderate to weak activities, confirming the moderate activity of KlOE against T. brucei. The values of the isolated EO components were as follows: phytol (82) (), oleic acid (81) (), and n-hexadecanoic acid (80) (). The best values were observed with the minority components: geranylacetone (85) (), α-ionone (86) (), and β-ionone (87) () (Figure 19). These components were evaluated against procyclic forms of T. brucei, and they were found to be even less active. According to the authors, these results can be an indication of the mechanisms of action of inhibition of T. brucei brucei growth. The authors suggest inhibition of glycolysis as a possible mechanism of action, as this is the main pathway of ATP synthesis for the bloodstream forms that do not possess the Krebs cycle or mitochondrial respiratory chain coupled to ATP. This phenomenon may explain their greater sensitivities compared with procyclic forms, highlighting the inhibitory activity of β-ionone (87) against glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (32.6% ± 3.4% at 20 μg/mL); however, the inhibitory effect was not significant for α-ionone (86) (0.00% ± 7.2% at 20 μg/mL) or phytol (82) (6.8% ± 0.7% at 20 μg/mL).

Another well-known plant in traditional medicine, Mentha crispa, was evaluated for EO activity by Sousa et al. [125]. They studied four activities against T. brucei bloodstream forms, as well as their cytotoxicity against human leukemic cells (HL-60). Phytochemical analysis identified major EO components, including rotundifolone (88) (58.11%), limonene (8) (10.58%), myrcene (61) (7.79%), germacrene (24) (6.55%), cis-β-ocimene (89) (5.01%), and β-pinene (39) (4.43%), as well as four other monoterpenic analogues: (+)-limonene epoxide (90), (−)-limonene epoxide (90), (−)-perillyl alcohol (91), and (−)-perillyl aldehyde (92) (Figure 20). The isolated compounds and the EO demonstrated dose-dependent activity in their minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values, varying from 1 to 100 μ/mL, and their GI50, varying from 0.3 to 13.3 μg/mL, compared to the standard drug suramin (, , ). Greater potentialities were observed for McEO (, , ), rotundifolone (88) (, , ), and (−)-perillyl aldehyde (92) (Figure 20) (, , ). These compounds were only slightly less active than the reference drug. The presence of rotundifolone (88) as the major component in the McEO should be the primary compound responsible for its high anti-T. brucei activity.

Structurally comparing these major components with other analogues, the presence of an α,β-unsaturated carbonyl appeared to favor anti-T. brucei activity, because when these components were absent there was significant loss of activity. The change in the position of this α,β-unsaturated carbonyl, and the change of position of an additional unsaturation outside of the ring, appeared to strongly influence the cytotoxicity in HL-60, where (−)-perillyl aldehyde (92) showed less toxicity than did rotundifolone (88), but with a better selectivity index [125].

Habila et al. [115] investigated the potential activity against T. brucei brucei of EOs from four plants (Cymbopogon citratus – leaves, Eucalyptus citriodora – leaves, Eucalyptus camaldulensis – leaves, and Citrus sinensis – fruit peels). CG-MS of EOs demonstrated an abundance of cyclobutane (93) (96.08%) in C. sinensis; eucalyptol (18) (75.04%), bicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-ene (94) (10.27%), benzene (95) (6.23%), and cyclohexene (96) (4.92%) in E. camaldulensis; 6-octenal (97) (77.11%) and 6-octen-1-ol (98) (14.09%) in E. citriodora; and citral (63) (38.32%) and 2,6-octadienal (99) (35.05%) and 2,6-octadien-1-ol (100) (26.63%) in C. citratus (Figure 21).

The death of the parasites was observed after the use of 0.4 g/mL of the EOs. The EO most capable of killing parasites quickly was the C. citratus EO (3 min). EOs from E. citriodora and E. camaldulensis killed parasites in 4 minutes, and C. sinensis EO killed parasites in 5 min. In smaller doses, the time of death increased to 6 min (0.2 g/mL) and 15 min (0.1 g/mL) for C. sinensis, 8 min (0.2 g/mL) and 17 min (0.1 g/mL) for E. camaldulensis, 8 min (0.2 g/mL) and 22 min (0.1 g/mL) for E. citriodora, and 4 min (0.2 g/mL) and 11 min (0.1 g/mL) for C. citratus. Thus, their activities appeared to be dose-dependent and the four EOs demonstrated powerful activity, causing the death of protozoa in short periods of time, compared with that of the reference drug (diminaveto) that promoted the death of the parasites in equivalent times.

Gutiérrez et al. [126] evaluated a species of the Piper genus, a well-known source of bioactive compounds [127]. Piper ossanum (leaves) was collected in two locations in Cuba (Bauta and Ceiba). Chromatograms of the EOs demonstrated the presence of 43 components for the Bauta species (PoB) and 39 for the Ceiba species (PoC). In both, the primary components were piperitone (57), camphene (15), camphor (14), and viridiflorol (101) (Figure 22), with PoB being more abundant (20.07% for PoB, and 19.01% for PoC). Some quantitative differences were observed in PoB and PoC EO constituents: camphor (14) (13.87% for PoB and 9.41% for PoC), viridiflorol (101) (12.97% for PoB and 18.80% for PoC), and camphene (15) (7.41% for PoB and 5.39% for PoC). PoB has as minor components p-cymene (11), sylvestrene (102), (Z)- and (E)-β-ocimene (89), terpinen-4-ol (103), cubebol (104), and humulene epoxide (105); PoC possessed small quantities of β-phellandrene (106), γ-muurolene (107), spathulenol (108), and globulol (109) (Figure 22). The values of the sensitivity of T. brucei against the EOs showed no significant difference in terms of values (8.1 μg/mL for PoB and 8.4 μg/mL for PoC), suggesting that the various compositions of their constituents were not decisive for a differentiation of their potential, classified as weak when compared to the standard drug suramin (). Both EOs demonstrated low toxicity in a human fetal lung fibroblast cell line (MRC-5) (4.2 μg/mL for PoB and 0.95 μ/mL for PoC). Evaluation of the T. brucei activity of the main compounds of each EO is necessary in order to identify more promising compounds.

Strychnos spinosa leaves are widely utilized in African trypanosomiasis treatment [128]. Hoet et al. [129] studied the cytotoxicity and the anti-T. brucei brucei activity of SsEO leaves and 16 of their components. SsEO leaves contained more than 100 constituents, including palmitic acid (71) (34.3%), linalool (3) (16%), (E)-phytol (82) (6.7%), and (E)-geraniol (6) (4%). SsEO showed moderately activity () and weak selectivity index (). Of the pure components tested, the prominent compounds were (E)-nerolidol (110) (Figure 23) (, ), linalool (3) (, ), (E)-geranylacetone (85) (, ), β-ionone (87) (, ), (E)-phytol (82) (, ), and α-terpineol (111) (Figure 23) (, ). Among these, only linalool (3) and (E)-phytol (82) were found in abundance in SsEO, leading to the conclusion that interaction with other compounds decreased the activity of the EO. In addition, the presence in minimal quantities of the more active compounds (identified as minority components) prevented the EOs from exerting their potential effects. Palmitic acid (71), the primary component for this species, was inactive and highly toxic ().

Preliminary results [101] demonstrated good antitrypanosomal activity of dichloromethane extracts of S. spinosa (), causing us to speculate that there are active components that are not EO constituents that should be evaluated more intensively. The better results observed with linalool (3) and (E)-nerolidol (110) reflect the need for further studies of these substances and for investigation of the potential of other oxygenated terpenes to identify alternatives for human African trypanosomiasis treatment.

Mulyaningsih et al. [130] investigated the Kadsura longipedunculata EO that had 50 identified components. The EO fraction was composed of 75% sesquiterpenes and 22.63% monoterpenes, including δ-cadinene (34) (21.79%), camphene (15) (7.27%), borneol (112) (6.05%) (Figure 24), cubenol (55) (5.12%), and δ-cadinol (56) (5.11%). KlEO and camphene (15) were evaluated against bloodstream forms of T. brucei brucei and human hepatocellular liver carcinoma (HepG2); however, the results were not encouraging. KlEO had an of 50.52 ± 0.029 μg/mL and an of 136.96 μg/mL. The of the pure compounds were 80.66 ± 0.87 μg/mL for camphene (15) and 70.00 ± 1.28 μg/mL for borneol (112), both unfavorable cytotoxicity profiles. These results indicate that the active substances of K. longepedunculata useful against human African trypanosomiasis treatment were not part of their EO constituents.

Hamdan and coworkers [131] evaluated the EOs of two Egyptian species of Citrus sp., C. jambhiri and C. pyriformis. For both species, 94 compounds were identified, with limonene (8) the major compound (92.48% for C. jambhiri and 75.56% for C. pyriformis). Both EOs had poor activity against bloodstream forms of T. b. brucei, with values of 72.47% ± 0.87 μg/mL for C. jambhiri and of 71.29 ± 0.38 μg/mL for C. pyriformis, much less active than the standard drug diminazene aceturate ().

Cruz et al. [119] evaluated the Eugenia uniflora EO from leaves and identified 87 compounds (spathulenol (108) – 15.8%, α-copaene (113) – 10.96%, muurola-4,10-dien-1β-ol (114) – 9.3%, caryophyllene oxide (38) – 8.93%, allo-aromadendrene (115) – 5.5%, and nootkatone (116) – 5.17%) (Figure 25). The oxygenated sesquiterpenes (54.09%) were the most abundant class of compounds. An in vitro T. b. brucei evaluation demonstrated moderate activity of EuEO () with a weak selectivity index (). The reference drug suramin had an of 0.16 ± 0.03 μg/mL.

Petrelli et al. [132] investigated the EO of Erigeron floribundus aerial parts, containing 85 constituents. The primary class of constituents was sesquiterpenes (60.4% - being 38.5% oxygenated and 21.9% hydrocarbons). The main components were caryophyllene oxide (38) (12.4%), spathulenol (108) (12.2%), (E)-β-farnesene (117) (Figure 26) (5.5%), and (E)-caryophyllene (22) (4.2%), in addition to limonene (8) (8.8%). EfEO was evaluated for its antitrypanosomal activity against T. brucei and cytotoxicity in a human breast adenocarcinoma cell line (A375). There was moderate activity () with a low selectivity index value (). Their main constituent, caryophyllene oxide (38), was also assayed and showed up inactive, reflecting the low antitrypanosomal activity of the EO. However, the evaluation of another potential major component, limonene (8), demonstrated promising activity ( and ), being the main contributor to the expression of EO potentiality. The authors concluded that this difference of activity in favor of limonene (8) could be attributed to the degree of its unsaturation, in addition to its exocyclic methylene group. The occurrence of a possible binding site with SH groups of proteins may be an indicator of their mechanism of action. However, this speculation requires more detailed investigation.

EOs from aerial parts of a variety of plant species were analyzed by Costa et al. [88], including Cymbopogon citratus L. (leaves), Distichoselinum tenuifolium (aerial parts), Juniperus oxycedrus (leaves and berries), Lavandula luisieri (influorescences), Lavandula viridis (aerial parts), Lippia graveolens (aerial parts), Mentha cervina (leaves), Mentha x piperita (leaves), Origanum virens (leaves), Rosmarinus officinalis (leaves), Seseli tortuosum (aerial parts), Syzygium aromaticum (floral buttons), Thymbra capitata (aerial parts), Thymus capitellatus (aerial parts), Thymus mastichina (leaves), and Thymus zygis sylvestris (leaves).

CG-MS allowed identification of the main components, including geranial (6) (45.7%), neral (7) (32.5%), and β-myrcene (61) (11.5%) for C. citratus; β-myrcene (61) (84.6%) and limonene (8) (2.2%) for D. tenuifolium; α-pinene (118) (54.7%), germacrene D (24) (10.4%), and β-myrcene (61) (17.8%) for the berries of J. oxycedrus; α-pinene (118) (65.5%), Δ-3-carene (119) (5.7%), β-phellandrene (106) (3.2%), and β-myrcene (61) (2.7%) for leaves of J. oxycedrus; 1,1,2,3-tetramethyl-4-hidroxymethyl-2-cyclopentene (120) (2.4%), 2,3,4,4-tetramethyl-5-methylene-cyclopent-2-enone (121) (5.2%), trans-α-necrodyl acetate (122) (16.0%), lyratyl acetate (123) (3.5%), 1,8-cineole (124) (18.9%), lavandulyl acetate (125) (7.2%), linalool (3) (3.1%), and α-pinene (118) (2.3%) for L. luisieri; 1,8-cineole (124) (29.7%), camphor (14) (10.0%), α-pinene (118) (9.2%), linalool (3) (9.0%), selina-3,7(11)-diene (126) (6.6%), Z-α-bisabolene (127) (6.3%), borneol (112) (2.7%), and camphene (15) (2.7%) for L. viridis; thymol (1) (19.8%), ρ-cymene (11) (16.9%), 1,8-cineole (124) (6.6%), caryophyllene oxide (38) (5.7%), linalool (3) (5.4%), Δ-3-carene (119) (4.3%), α-terpineol (111) (3.6%), myrcene (61) (3.4%), E-caryophyllene (22) (2.4%), and trans-sabinene hydrate (17) (2.3%) for L. graveolens; pulegone (128) (74.8%), isomenthone (129) (10.6%), and limonene (8) (5.4%) for M. cervina; menthol (130) (44.0%), menthofuran (131) (10.9%), menthone (132) (9.8%), menthyl acetate (133) (7.8%), 1,8-cineole (124) (5.8%), neo-menthol (134) (4.0%), neo-isomenthol (135) (2.9%), and pulegone (128) (2.4%) for M. x piperita; carvacrol (10) (68.2%), γ-terpinene (64) (7.9%), p-cymene (11) (7.4%), β-myrcene (61) (2.4%), and thymol (1) (2.1%) for O. virens; β-myrcene (61) (32.0%), 1,8-cineole (124) (13.7%), camphor (14) (11.9%), α-pinene (118) (11.1%), limonene (8) (6.6%), ρ-cymene (11) (3.8%), camphene (15) (3.4%), and linalool (3) (2.1%) for R. officinalis; α-pinene (118) (27.4%), β-pinene (39) (16.0%), limonene (8) (10.0%), γ-terpinene (64) (9.3%), (Z)-β-ocimene (89) (8.0%), β-myrcene (61) (3.0%), camphene (15) (2.1%), and sabinene (17) (2.0%) for S. tortuosum; eugenol (2) (85.3%) and humulene (136) (6.8%) for S. aromaticum; carvacrol (10) (74.6%), p-cymene (11) (5.5%), E-caryophyllene (22) (3.9%), γ-terpinene (64) (3.6%), and linalool (3) (2.8%) for T. capitata; 1,8-cineole (124) (58.6%), borneol (112) (10.0%), camphene (15) (6.5%), α-pinene (118) (4.5%), sabinene (17) (3.0%), and β-pinene (39) (2.0%) for T. capitellatus; 1,8-cineole (124) (67.4%), linalool (3) (4.3%), β-pinene (39) (4.0%), α-terpineol (111) (3.5%), α-pinene (118) (3.0%), and sabinene (17) (2.4%) for T. mastichina; and geranyl acetate (41) (44.5%), geraniol (6) (33.1%), and camphor (14) (3.9%) for T. zygis sylvestris (Figure 27).

Of all these EOs, noteworthy findings were as follows: JoEO berries ( and ), CcEO ( and ), and LlEO ( and ). Some pure compounds were also evaluated, and the best IC50 values were obtained with α-pinene (118) () and citral (63) (). α-Pinene (118) is the main component of the most active EO (Juniperus oxycedrus), contributing to its high anti-T. brucei activity. Because the same result was not observed with JoEO leaves, the authors speculated that the synergistic effects on the most promising species potentiated their effects, suggesting that their interactions with germacrene D (24) and β-myrcene (61) should be further investigated [88].

Cheikh-Ali et al. [133] evaluated the EO from Aframomum sceptrum rizhomes. AsEO consists of 75 compounds, including β-pinene (39) (12.71%), caryophyllene oxide (38) (10.03%), cyperene (137) (5.99%), 3,4-dimethylcyclohex-3-ene-1-carbaldehyde (138) (3.40%), α-pinene (118) (2.78%), β-caryophyllene (22) (2.33%), α-terpineol (111) (2.12%), D-limonene (8) (1.89%), 1,8-cineole (124) (1.84%), and α-caryophyllene (or humulene) (136) (1.1%) (Figure 28). The minimum lethal concentration (MLC) against T. brucei brucei was determined for the EO () and for some pure compounds, β-pinene (39) () and caryophyllene oxide (38) (). When compared to the reference drug pentamidine (), this EO and their components showed very good anti-T. brucei brucei activities.

Herrmann et al. [134] obtained the Carlina acaulis root EO and identified carlina oxide (139) (Figure 29) as its main component. Evaluation of the antitrypanosomal activity of carlina oxide against T. b. brucei demonstrated promising results (), with great selectivity index values (). In addition to the pure compound (main component of the C. acaulis EO), the authors analyzed the hexane, dichloromethane, and methanol extracts, and the two former (with considerable amount of carlina oxide (139)) were more active ( () and 4.5 μg/mL (), respectively) than was the latter (, ). When compared to the reference drug suramin ( and ), carlina oxide (139) showed greater activity and better selectivity index. The authors suggested that the mechanism of action of carlina oxide (139) occurred through trypanothione reductase inhibition. The presence of the furan ring and the triple bond were considered by the authors to be important structural features for the activity and should be considered for the design of new drugs.

Kamte et al. [135] investigated the EOs of several herb species from the Apiaceae family from the Mediterranean zone (Siler montanum Crantz subsp. siculum – flowering aerial parts, Sison amomum L. – flowering aerial parts, Echinophora spinosa L. – roots and flowering aerial parts, Kundmannia sicula (L.) DC. – inflorescences, Crithmum maritimum L. – flowering aerial parts, Helosciadium nodiflorum (L.) Koch – whole, Pimpinella anisum L. – seeds, Heracleum sphondylium subsp. ternatum (Velen.) Brummit – seeds, and Trachyspermum ammi (L.) Sprague – seeds). The EOs from five of these plants were potent inhibitors of T. brucei (SaEO – 4.3 ± 0.7 μg/mL, EsEO roots – 2.7 ± 0.6 μg/mL, EsEO aerial parts – 4.0 ± 1.6 μg/mL, CmEO– 5.0 ± 0.8 μg/mL, and HnEO – 10.7 ± 4 μg/mL), and some of their main components were evaluated in isolation. The great potentiality of these EOs was attributed to the presence of the main constituents, considering as well the great importance of synergistic effects with minority constituents. For SaEO, the main constituents were sabinene (17) (54.4%), β-phellandrene (106) (16.6%), and germacrene D (24) (6.7%). For EsEO roots, they were myristicin (41.3%) (140), terpinolene (141) (22.2%), and (Z)-falcarinol (142) (23.3%); for EsEO aerial parts, they were α-phellandrene (143) (47.2%), p-cymene (11) (25.6%), β-phellandrene (106) (8.3%), E,E-2,6-dimethyl-1,3,5,7-octatetraene (144) (6.3%), and α-pinene (118) (5.5%) (Figure 30); for CmEO, they were limonene (8) (38.4%), γ-terpinene (64) (19.9%), and sabinene (17) (12.4%); and for HnEO, they were myristicin (140) (49.1%), (Z)-β-ocimene (89) (19%), limonene (8) (7.8%), terpinolene (141) (7.1%), and germacrene D (24) (6.0%). With the exception of CmEO, all other active EOs showed significant selectivities against T. brucei, as well as good selectivity index values. For example, in their cytotoxicity evaluation performed in Balb3T3 rat fibroblasts, they found for S. amomum, 2.1 and 3.7 for E. spinosa roots and aerial parts, respectively, and >9.1 for H. nodiflorum.

The isolated components from the EOs were also evaluated by Kamte et al. [135]. Some of these showed more activity and selectivity than did their respective EOs. The most active constituents against T. brucei were terpinolene (141) (0.035 ± 0.005 μg/mL, ), α-pinene (118) (1.0 ± 0.3 μg/mL, ), β-ocimene (89) ( of 1.1 ± 0.5 μg/mL, ), p-cymene (11) ( of 4.5 ± 1.0 μg/mL, ), limonene (8) ( of 5.6 ± 1.6 μg/mL, ), sabinene (17) ( of 6.0 ± 1.5 μg/mL, ), α-phellandrene (143) ( of 24 ± 8 μg/mL, ), and myristicin (140) ( of 74 ± 4 μg/mL, ). As observed for the previous values, the high anti-T. brucei potentiality of terpinolene (141) should be responsible for the great value found in EsEO roots, containing these compounds as its primary constituents.

Comparison of the chemical structure of terpinolene (141) with other structurally similar compounds (γ-terpinene (64), α-phellandrene (143), limonene (8), and p-cymene (11)) highlighted the great importance of the presence of a double endocyclic and a double exocyclic bound, the latter linking the cyclohexene ring to a dimethylated carbon for the inhibition of T. brucei growth. This can be used as scaffold for drug design of new anti-T. brucei agents.

Petrelli et al. [81] evaluated EOs of many parts of Smyrnium olusatrum L. (roots, leaves, flowers, and fruits), known to be rich in furan ring-containing sesquiterpenes as the main constituents. CG-MS analysis identified a domain of oxygenated sesquiterpenes (68.2% - 74.5%), followed by monoterpene hydrocarbons (13.2–22.2%) and sesquiterpene hydrocarbons (3.1-14.1%). The EO from the fruits resulted in the identification of 66 constituents, including β-acetoxyfuranoeudesm-4(15)-ene (145) (31.2%), curzerene (146) (23.8%), isofuranodiene (147) (6.6%), β-phellandrene (106) (6.2%), and α-pinene (118) (5.4%). Among the flower EOs, they found 47 compounds, including curzerene (146) (30.5%), myrcene (61) (18.2%), furanoeremophil-1-one (148) (12.1%), germacrone (149) (10.4%), and isofuranodiene (147) (9.8%) (Figure 31). They identified 45 compounds from roots EO, including curzerene (146) (39.7%), furanoeremophil-1-one (148) (24.4%), β-phellandrene (106) (14.4%), and isofuranodiene (147) (5.8%). The EO from leaves produced 43 constituents, including furanoeremophil-1-one (148) (30.0%), curzerene (146) (24.1%), germacrone (149) (9.7%), β-pinene (39) (9.5%), and isofuranodiene (147) (4.8%).

These SoEOs showed effectiveness against T. brucei brucei with satisfactory SIs. The most powerful EO was obtained from fruits (, SI = 29), followed by the EO from flowers (, SI = 23) and from leaves (, ), and at least active was the EO from roots (, ). Some pure compounds were also tested, including isofuranodiene (147) (, ), β-acetoxyfuranoeudesm-4(15)-ene (145) (, ), and germacrone (149) () which had the best profiles. Taking into account that curzerene (146) is a thermal degradation product of isofuranodiene (147) [136, 137], and considering the abundance of these two constituents, it may be considered that isofuranodiene (147) is the major component of all SoEO and is therefore responsible for their antitrypanosomal activities. The SoEO from fruit had as its principal component β-acetoxyfuranoeudesm-4(15)-ene (145), also contributing to its superior potential over the other components.

Structurally, the absence of the furan ring in germacrone (149), as opposed to isofuranodiene (147) and β-acetoxyfuranoeudesm-4(15)-ene (145) structures (Figure 20), can be the main explanation of its inactivity. In addition, the more potent compound isofuranodiene (147) was already known for its inhibitory activity against dihydrofolate reductase, an important enzyme in purine biosynthesis and therefore in DNA synthesis. This may be the mechanism of action for its inhibition of T. brucei brucei growth [138].

Muhd Haffiz and colleagues [121] evaluated the anti-T. brucei brucei activity of Cymbopogon nardus L. (whole plant) EO and fractions, using pentamidine (, ) as the standard drug. CG-MS revealed that the majority of the constituents of CnEO were oxygenated monoterpenes (79%), sesquiterpenes (12.3%), oxygenated sesquiterpenes (2.6%), and monoterpene hydrocarbons (1.9%), including citronellal (62) (35.5%), geraniol (6) (28%), and citronellol (51) (11%). In the biological evaluation, C. nardus EO exhibited strong antitrypanosomal activity and high SI (, ).

These EOs were fractionated into 7 fractions, then combined, and then refracted into 8 subfractions, and finally their activities were determined. In the great majority of cases, the fractions and subfractions showed great potential for inhibition of T. b. brucei growth with low cytotoxicity. The most active fractions were as follows: subfraction 4 (, ), subfraction 6 (, ), subfraction 7 (, ), and subfraction 8 (, ). The major constituents were γ-eudesmol (150) (Figure 32) and α-cadinol (53) for subfractions 4 and 6 and elemol (52) for subfractions 7 and 8.

Essential oils from aromatic and medicinal plants from Cameroon with known antitrypanosomal properties were evaluated by Kamte et al. [18]. The authors identified chemical compositions and evaluated the anti-T. brucei potential of the EOs and constituents from Azadirachta indica (leaves), Aframomum melegueta (seeds), Aframomum daniellii (leaves), Clausena anisata (leaves), Dichrostachys cinerea (seeds), and Echinops giganteus (roots).

For AiEO, 13 compounds were identified, with abundance of sesquiterpene hydrocarbons (97.4%), especially germacrene B (151) (74.0%) and γ-elemene (152) (18.3%) (Figure 33); for AmEO, 59 compounds were identified, with abundance of oxygenated monoterpenes (83.3%), of which 1,8-cineole (124) (58.5%), α-terpineol (111) (19.4%), and β-pinene (39) (7.1%) were the main constituents; for AdEO, 57 compounds were identified, with greater abundance of monoterpene hydrocarbons (59.8%), where sabinene (17) (43.9%), (E)-caryophyllene (22) (16.6%), and β-pinene (39) (5.8%) were the most abundant; for CaEO, 47 compounds were identified, with abundance of phenylpropanoids (84.0%), where (E)-anethole (153) (64.6%) and (E)-methyl isoeugenol (2) (16.1%) (Figure 33) were the main constituents; for EgEO, 35 compounds were identified, with abundance of sesquiterpenes (94.3%-54.7% of sesquiterpene hydrocarbons and 39.6% of oxygenated sesquiterpenes), where silphiperfol-6-ene (154) (23.0%), presilphiperfolan-8-ol (155) (22.7%), presilphiperol-7-ene (156) (7.8%), cameroonan-7-α-ol (157) (7.1%), and caryophyllene (22) (6.3%) were the most abundant (Figure 33); and for D. cinereal, 49 compounds were identified, and the class of oxygenated monoterpenes (50.6%) was the primary, and geraniol (6) (18.2%), terpinen-4-ol (103) (7.5%), linalool (3) (4.0%), and umbellulone (158) (3.8%) were the most representative constituents. Representative amounts of other classes of compounds were also observed, especially ligustrazin (159) (5.1%), elemicin (160) (3.0%), and decanoic acid (161) (2.8%) (Figure 33).

The in vitro evaluation of these EOs demonstrated inactivity of DcEO, AmEO, and CaEO (), and moderate activity of AdEO (), EgEO (), and AiEO (), when compared to standard drug suramin (). The SIs of the three more active EOs were also evaluated and were >13.1, >9.52, and >6.57, respectively [18].

Some of the main constituents of A. melegueta and A. daniellii EOs were also evaluated. 1,8-Cineole (124) and terpinen-4-ol (103) (main compounds of AmEO) were inactive (), while sabinene (17) (), (E)-caryophyllene (22) (), and β-pinene (39) (), main components of AdEO, showed moderate to good anti-T. brucei activities [18].

1.3. Essentials Oils Active against Leishmaniasis

Leishmaniasis is a group of noncontagious infectious diseases caused by at least 20 parasitic protozoa belonging to the family Trypanosomatidae (genus Leishmania). It is estimated that at least 12 million people in more than 100 countries are infected, and at least another 350 million people are at risk in endemic areas [139, 140]. This set of diseases can be divided into two major groups of distinct diseases, tegumentary leishmaniasis (subdivided into cutaneous, diffuse cutaneous, and mucosal), and visceral leishmaniasis, usually more severe, with high mortality [139, 141].

The life cycle of Leishmania sp. begins with the blood supply of a phlebotomine that infects itself through the blood of an infected mammalian, ingesting amastigote forms of the parasite that are internalized in macrophages. In the intestine of the vector-insect, the amastigote form becomes a metacyclic promastigote form. When the insect is fed again and it bites a new mammalian, virulent promastigote forms are inoculated in the new host. In the bloodstream, they are internalized by macrophages, differentiating again into amastigotes, thus completing the cycle [140, 141].

The few therapeutic options available for treatment include a class of drugs that is more than 60 years old, the pentavalent antimonials (meglumine antimoniate and sodium stibogluconate). More recently, for the treatment of refractory and resistant cases, pentamidine, miltefosine, amphotericin B, and paromomycin are used [140].

In the same way as observed for the trypanosomiases described above, the scarcity of drugs for leishmaniasis necessitated the use of plants, and parts of plants, as therapeutic alternatives in several parts of the world.

Between 2000 and 2018, the literature reported the use of EOs from 142 plant species (30 families) and 44 isolated compounds that were evaluated against various Leishmania species (Leishmania amazonensis, Leishmania braziliensis, Leishmania aethiopica, Leishmania donovani, Leishmania chagasi, Leishmania infantum, Leishmania guyanensis, Leishmania panamensis, Leishmania mexicana, Leishmania tropica, and Leishmania major) and forms (promastigote, axenic amastigote, and intracellular amastigote).

The most studied families were Lamiaceae, Piperaceae, and Asteraceae, with 35, 29, and 14 species evaluated, respectively. Fifty-one of the EOs (especially from plant species the families Lamiaceae and Asteraceae) and 13 isolated compounds showed values less than or equal to 10 μg/mL against at least one species of Leishmania (promastigote or amastigote forms) and were considered active based on hit selection criteria for visceral leishmaniasis [142]. In addition, four EOs and one isolated compound showed quantified activity in nanomolar concentrations, considered strongly active (Tables 1 and 2 and Figure 34) (see supplementary material Figures S1 and S2). In our review, some of the most active EOs and pure compounds were detailed for their major constituents (for EOs), efficacy ( values), selectivity index (SI), and morphological and ultrastructure alterations in the parasite, as well as for their mechanism of action. For inactive extracts and chemical entities (), and for those in which only the parasite was sensitive (moderate activity; ), see supplementary material (Table S1).


Plant familyPlant speciePlant originPart of plantMajor constituents (%)LC50/Leishmania specie (evolutive form)SIRef.

RutaceaeRuta chalepensisTunisia/Sned regionAerial parts2-Undecanone (162) (84.28%)8.16 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
1.13 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
1.57 for L. major and 2.7 for L. infantuma[143]

UmbelliferaePituranthos tortuosusTunisia/Sned regionAerial partsnd0.64 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
0.66 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
0.78 for L. major and 0.76 for L. infantuma[143]

CyperaceaeCyperus rotundusTunisia/Sned regionAerial partsnd1.40 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
0.55 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
0.09 for L. major and 0.23 for L. infantuma[143]

CupressaceaeTetraclinis articulataTunisia/Sned regionAerial partsnd>8 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
3.31 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
0.25 for L. major and 0.6 for L. infantuma[143]

PinaceaePinus halepensisTunisia/Sned regionAerial partsnd2.23 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
1.92 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
0.61 for L. major and 0.94 for L. infantuma[143]

FabaceaeCopaifera reticulataBrazil/Pará StateTrunksβ-Caryophyllene (22) (40.9%)5.0 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
15.0 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis
(axenic amastigote)
20.0 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (intracellular amastigote)
8.0 for promastigote and 2.5 for axenic amastigote[153]
Copaifera multijugaBrazil/Amazonas StateTrunksβ-Caryophyllene (22) (57.5%)
Copalic acid (164) (6.2%)
10.0 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)nd[153]
Vouacapoua americanaFrench GuianaWoodnd7.2 μg/mL/L. amazonensis (axenic amastigote)5.0[190]
Copaifera ssp. (C1) commercial oilBrazil/Acre Statendtrans-β-Caryophyllene (22) (44.23%)
α-Humulene (136) (7.29)
Caryophyllene oxide (38) (10.17)
2.9 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis
(amastigote)
29.3[157]
Copaifera ssp. (C4) commercial oilBrazil/Pará Statendtrans-β-Caryophyllene (22) (36.46%)
Copalic acid (164) (7.62%)
Germacrene D (24) (4.56%)
2.3 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis
(amastigote)
40.1[157]

LamiaceaeSatureja punctataInchini/Addis AbadaLeavesGeranial (6) (27.62%)
Neral (7) (21.72%)
α-Bisabolol (165) (13.62%)
156.5 μg.mL−1/L. donovani (promastigote)
312.5 μg.mL−1/L. aethiopica (promastigote)
8.70 μg.mL−1/L. donovani
(axenic amastigote)
4.06 μg.mL−1/L. aethiopica
(axenic amastigote)
0.001 for L. donovani and
0.05 for L. aethiopica
[159]
Thymus hirtus sp. AlgeriensisTunisia/Sned regionAerial partsLinalool (3) (17.62%)
Camphor (14) (13.82%)
Terpinen-4-ol (103) (6.80%)
0.43 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
0.25 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
0.19 for L. major and 1.34 for L. infantuma[143]
Rosmarinus officinalisTunisia/Sned regionAerial partsnd>8 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
3.05 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
0.09 for L. major and 0.23 for L. infantuma[143]
Teucrium alopecurusTunisia/Sned regionAerial partsnd1.14 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
0.30 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
0.05 for L. major and 0.21 for L. infantuma[143]
Lavandula multifidaTunisia/Sned regionAerial partsnd>8 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
>8 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
nd[143]
Lavandula stoechasMorocco/Province of QuezzaneAerial partsFenchone (166) (31.81%)
Camphor (14) (29.60%)
Terpineol (111) (13.1%)
0.9 μg/mL/L. major (promastigote)
μg/mL/L. infantum (promastigote)
nd[171]
Origanum compactum BenthMorocco/Province of QuezzaneAerial parts (vegetative, flowering and post-flowering)p-Cymene (11) (17.81–19.24%)
Thymol (1) (15.32-38.01%)
Carvacrol (10) (6.39–43.58%)
0.13–0.26 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
0.02–0.12 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
0.22–0.72 μg.mL−1/L. tropica (promastigote)
nd[173]
Mentha pulegiumMorocco/Province of QuezzaneAerial partsPulegone (128) (40.98%)
Menthone (132) (21.164%)
1.3 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
2.2 μg.mL−1/L. tropica (promastigote)
nd[172]
Rosmarinus officinalisMorocco/Province of QuezzaneAerial parts1,8-Cineole (124) (23.673%)
Camphor (14) (18.743%)
Borneol (112) (15.46%)
2.6 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
1.2 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
3.5 μg.mL−1/L. tropica (promastigote)
nd[172]
Tetradenia ripariaBrazil/Paraná StateLeavesSummer
Fenchone (166) (5.54%)
α-Cadinol (53) (16.91%)
14-Hydroxy-9-epi-caryophyllene (167) (15.28%);
Summer
15.67 ng.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
Summer
94.19
[191]
Winter
α-Cadinol (53) (14.82%)
14-Hydroxy-9-epi-caryophyllene (167) (10.23%)
Dehydroroyleanone (168) (20.47%)
Winter
13.31 ng.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
Winter
76.80
Autumn
α-Cadinol (53) (17.16%)
14-Hydroxy-9-epi-caryophyllene (167) (13.10%)
Dehydroroyleanone (168) (16.50%).
Autumn
15.66 ng.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
Autumn
25.01
Spring
α-Cadinol (53) (13.81%)
14-Hydroxy-9-epi-caryophyllene (167) (12.70%)
6,7-Dehydroroyleanone (168) (12.51%)
Spring
15.47 ng.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
Spring
67.51
Tetradenia ripariaBrazil/Paraná StateLeavesnd0.03 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)5.67[192]
Tetradenia ripariaBrazil/Paraná StateLeavesnd30.0 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis
(intracellular amastigote)
nd[175]
Teucrium poliumNorthern TunisiaAerial partsCarvacrol (10) (56.06%)
β -Caryophyllene (22) (7.68%)
α-Pinene (118) (5.02%)
0.09 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (Promastigotes)
0.15 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigotes)
40.44 for L. infantum
and 24.26 for L. major
[174]
Salvia officinalisNorthern TunisiaAerial partsnd2.67 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (Promastigote)
3.4 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
7.54 for L. infantum
and 5.92 for L. major
[174]
Thymus hirtusNorthern TunisiaAerial partsα-Pinene (118) (16.93%)5.90 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (Promastigote)
8.8 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
24.78 for L. infantum
and 16.61 for L. major
[174]

AsteraceaeArtemisia absinthium L.Inchini/Addis AbadaLeavesCamphor (14) (27.40%)
Davanone (169) (16.43%)
Ethyl(E)-cinnamate (170) (5.81%)
0.15 μg.mL−1/L. donovani (promastigote)
0.15 μg.mL−1/L. aethiopica (promastigote)
42.0 μg.mL−1/L. donovani
(axenic amastigote)
7.94 μg.mL−1/L. aethiopica
(axenic amastigote)
3.6 for L. donovani and 19.2 for L. aethiopica[158]
Echinops kebericho MesfinInchini/Addis AbadaTubersDehydrocostus lactone (171) (41.83%)
β-Phellandrene (106) (10.84%)
Germacrene B (151) (5.38%)
0.07 μg.mL−1/L. donovani (promastigote)
0.00097 μg.mL−1/L. aethiopica (promastigote)
0.50 μg.mL−1/L. donovani
(axenic amastigote)
0.24 μg.mL−1/L. aethiopica
(axenic amastigote)
0.8 for L. donovani and 1.7 for L. aethiopica[158]
Achillea millefoliumBrazil/Paraná StateLeaves and flowersnd7.8 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
6.5 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis
(intracellular amastigote)
9.2 for promastigote and 11.0 for intracellular amastigote[161]
Matricaria chamomillaUSA/ClackamasFlowersnd10.30 μg.mL−1/L. braziliensis
(intracellular amastigote)
2.87 μg.mL−1/L. panamensis
(intracellular amastigote)
230 μg.mL−1/L. braziliensis
(axenic amastigote)
2.93 for L. braziliensis intracellular amastigote, 10.52 for L. panamensis intracellular amastigote, and 0.14 for L. braziliensis axenic amastigote[193]
Pulicaria gnaphalodesIran/Tabas regionAerial parts1,8-Cineole (124) (9.45%)
α-Pinene (118) (3.81%)
α-Terpineol (111) (3.63%)
0.27 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)nd[194]
Vanillosmopsis arborea BakerBrazil/Ceará StateStemsα-Bisabolol (165) (97.9%)
o-Methyl eugenol (172) (1.6%)
Bisabolol oxide (173) (0.5%)
7.35 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
12.58 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (intracellular amastigote)
11.52[183]
Artemisia herba albaNorthern TunisiaAerial partsnd1.22 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
2.78 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
7.21 for L. infantum
and 3.16 for L. major
[174]
Artemisia campestrisα-Pinene (118) (24.98%)3.24 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
4.59 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
24.87 for L. infantum
and 17.55 for L. major
[174]
Mikania micranthaFrench Guianand6.8 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (axenic amastigote)7.0[190]
Artemisia annuaJamia HamdardLeavesCamphor (14) (52.06%)
β-Caryophyllene (22) (10.95%)
1,8-Cineole (124) (5.57%)
14.63 μg.mL−1/L. donovani (promastigote)
7.3 μg.mL−1/L. donovani
(Intracellular amastigote)
[163]

MyrtaceaeEugenia uniflora L.Brazil/São Luís StateLeavesCurzerene (146) (47.3%)
γ-Elemene (152) (14.25%)
trans-β-Elemenone (174) (10.4%)
3.04 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
1.92 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (amastigote)
14.9 for promastigote and 23.9 for amastigote[163]
Myrtus communisndAerial partsα-Pinene (118) (52.52%)4.58 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
6.28 μg/mL/L. major (promastigote)
27.86 for L. infantum
and 20.31 for L. major
[174]
Eucalyptus globulusTunisia/Sned regionAerial partsnd0.98 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
0.68 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
0.27 for L. major and 0.38 for L. infantuma[143]
Myrtus communisKerman provinceLeavesα-Pinene (118) (24.7%)
1,8-Cineole (124) (19.6%)
Linalool (3) (12.6%)
8.4 μg/mL/L. tropica (promastigote)
11.6 μg/mL/L. tropica (amastigote)
11.7[195]

EuphorbiaceaeCroton cajucaraBrazil/Amazonas StateLeavesLinalool (3)8.3 ng.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
15.5 ng.mL−1/L. amazonensis (amastigote)
nd[162]
Croton pedicellatusTolimaLeavesBorneol (112)
γ-Terpinene (64)
Germacrene D (24)
trans-β-Caryophyllene (22)
46.68 μg.mL−1/L. panamensis (amastigote)
7.14 μg.mL−1/L. panamensis (promastigote)
19.77 μg.mL−1/L. braziliensis
(amastigote)
19.65 μg.mL−1/L. braziliensis (promastigote)
0.83 for L. panamensis (amastigotes), 1.30 for L. panamensis (promastigotes), 0.47 for L. braziliensis (amastigotes), and 0.47 for L. braziliensis (promastigotes)[196]

PoaceaeCymbopogon citratusBrazil/Paraná StateLeavesCitral (63)
Geranial (6) (42.2%)
Neral (7) (36.3%)
1.7 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
3.2 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (amastigote)
14.7 for promastigote and 7.8 for amastigote[167]
Cymbopogon citratusFrench GuianaLeavesnd5.3 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis
(axenic amastigote)
5.0[188]

PiperaceaePiper angustifolium Lam.Brazil/Mato Grosso do Sul StateLeavesSpathulenol (108) (23.78%) Caryophyllene oxide (38) (13.06%)1.43 μg.mL−1/L. infantum
(intracellular amastigote)
22.15[170]
Piper hispidum (Piperaceae)French GuianaLeavesCurzerene (146) (15.7%),
Germacrene B (151) (10.9%)
α-Selinene (175) (10.5%)
3.4 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis
(axenic amastigote)
4.7 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis
(intracellular amastigote)
11.0 for axenic amastigote and 8.0 for intracellular amastigotes-[188]

AnnonaceaeAnnona foetidaBrazil/Amazonas StateLeavesBicyclogermacrene (23) (35.12%)
(E)-Caryophyllene (22) (14.19%)
α-Copaene (113) (8.19%)
16.2 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
9.9 μg.mL−1/L. braziliensis (promastigote)
27.2 μg.mL−1/L. chagasi (promastigote)
4.1 μg.mL−1/L. guyanensis (promastigote)
nd[197]
Xylopia discretaColombia/Municipality of BarrancabermejaLeavesα- and β-Pyrene (176)
Camphene (15)
β-Myrcene (61)
1,8-Cineol (128)
b and 6.25cμg.mL−1/L. panamensis (promastigote)b11.0b and 25.6c[198]

VerbenaceaeLippia citriodoraAntioquiaAerial partsLimonene (8) (8.4%)
Neral (7) (15.0%)
Geranial (6) (17.5%)
5.2 μg.mL−1/L. chagasi (promastigote)nd[56]
Lippia origanoidesCauca/MercaderesAerial partsp-Cymene (11) (11.5%)
Thymol (1) (53.6%)
4.4 μg.mL−1/L. chagasi (promastigote)nd[56]
Lantana camaraBrazil/Minas Gerais StateLeavesGermacrene-D (24) (24.90%)
(E)-Caryophyllene (22) (14.31%)
(E,E)-Farnesene (117) (11.58%)
0.25 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
18 μg.mL−1/L. chagasi
(promastigote)
LC50 10 μg/mL and CC50μg/mL[145]

ApiaceaeFerula communisNorthern TunisiaAerial partsβ-Caryophyllene (22) (15.22%)
Myrcene (61) (10.33%)
α-Eudesmol (177) (9.8%)
0.05 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
0.11 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
81.60 for L. infantum
37.09 for L. major
[174]

GeraniaceaePelargonium graveolensNorthern TunisiaAerial partsCitronellol (51) (24.75%)
Geraniol (6) (13.99%)
γ-Eudesmol (150) (11.23%)
0.11 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
0.28 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
57.36 for L. infantum
22.53 for L. major
[174]

BurseraceaeProtium ovatumBrazil/Goiás StateLeavesSpathulenol (108) (17.6%)
Caryophyllene oxide (38) (16.4%)
β-Caryophyllene (22) (14.0%)
2.28 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)nd[199]
Protium heptaphyllumFrench GuianaFruitsnd3.7 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (axenic amastigote)19.0[188]

ScrophulariaceaeAchetaria guianensisFrench GuianaLeaves and stemsnd6.3 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (axenic amastigote)5.0[188]

PlantaginaceaeOtacanthus azureusFrench GuianaAerial partsnd0.7 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (axenic amastigote)
16.1 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis
(intracellular amastigote)
51.0 for axenic amastigote and 2.0 for intracellular amastigote[188]

ChenopodiaceaeChenopodium ambrosioidesHavana CityAerial partsCarvacrol (10) (62.36%)
Ascaridole (37) (22.54%)
/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
/L. amazonensis (amastigote)
15.0[120]
Chenopodium ambrosioidesHavana CityAerial partsnd/L. donovani (promastigote)
/L. donovani (amastigote)
nd[177]
Chenopodium ambrosioidesHavana CityAerial partsnd3.74 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)nd[176]

BixaceaeBixa orellana L.Havana CityFruitsIshwarane (178) (18.6%)
Geranylgeraniol (5) (9.1%)
Bicyclogermacrene (23) (8.4%)
8.54 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis
(amastigote)
7.0[181]

aSI calculated as IC80/IC50. bMurine infection assay (J774 cells infected with L. panamensis). cHuman infection assay (U937 cells infected with L. panamensis). nd: not determined.

ClassesName and/or chemical structure of isolated or synthesized compoundActivity (IC50)/Leishmania specie (evolutive form)SIRef.

Monoterpene hydrocarbon3-Carene (119)72.5 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)nd[187]
p-Cymene (11)>1000 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)nd[187]
α-Pinene (118)19.7 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
16.1 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (axenic amastigote)
15.6 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (intracellular amastigote)
21.5 for promastigote, 26.4 for axenic amastigote, and 27.2 for intracellular amastigote[169]

Oxygenated monoterpeneCarvacrol (10)25.4 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)nd[187]
Thymol (1)26.8 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
9.8 μg.mL−1/L. chagasi (promastigote)
nd[187, 200]
(−)-Carvone (13)194.7 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)nd[187]
(−)-Menthol (130)198.9 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)nd[187]
1,8-Cineole (124)568.1 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)nd[187]
Linalool (3)550 μg.mL−1/L. infantum chagasi (axenic amastigote)
276.2 μg.mL−1 or 8.3 ng.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
15.5 ng.mL−1/L. amazonensis (amastigote)
nd[162] [187] [166]
Citral (63)8.0 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigotes)
25.0 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (amastigotes)
6.3 for promastigote and 2.0 for amastigote[167]
Geraniol (9)3.78 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
5.57 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
21.26 for L. infantum
14.43 for L. major
[174]
Camphor (14)5.55 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
7.90 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
4.56 for L. infantum
3.20 for L. major
[174]
Carvacrol (10)7.35 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
9.15 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigotes)
2.3 μg.mL−1/L. chagasi (promastigote)
34.08 for L. infantum and
27.37 for L. major
[174, 200]
Ascaridole (37)0.1 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
0.3 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (amastigote)
4.0[64]

Oxygenated sesquiterpene(−)-α-Bisabolol (165)10.99 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
4.95 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
9.38 for L. amazonensis[183, 185]
Caryophyllene Oxide (38)4.9 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
13.6 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (amastigote)
1.0[64]
β-Caryophyllene (22)1.3 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (amastigote)
1.06 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
1.33 μg.mL−1/L. major (promastigote)
48.9 for L. amazonensis, 20.82 for L. infantum, and 16.59 for L. major[174]

Phenolic compoundsEugenol (2)220 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigote)
500 μg.mL−1/L. infantum chagasi (axenic amastigote)
82.9 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)
nd[166, 187]

PhenylpropanoidIsoborneol (179)
190.2 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)nd[187]

Diterpene6,7-Dehydroroyleanone (167)μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigote)0.22[192]

Others8.75 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigotes)>45.71[186]
10.49 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigotes)>38.13[186]
4.71 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigotes)>84.92[186]
11.40 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigotes)nd[186]
10.56 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigotes)nd[186]
5.91 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigotes)nd[186]
18.08 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigotes)nd[186]
22.30 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigotes)nd[186]
13.60 μg.mL−1/L. amazonensis (promastigotes)nd[186]

5-[(3E)-Oct-3-en-1-il]-1,3-benzodioxole
82.5 μg.mL−1/L. infantum (promastigotes)2.4[186]

nd: not determined.

EOs from 10 plants issued from the Sned region of Tunisia, an endemic region for various forms of Leishmania, showed antileishmanial activities against L. major and L. infantum promastigote forms. In general, for all tested extracts, L. infantum species were more sensitive than were L. major, and only two EOs were more effective against the parasites than were murine macrophagic cells. EOs from Thymus hirtus sp. Algeriensis, rich in oxygen-containing monoterpenes, especially linalool (3) (17.62%) and camphor (14) (13.82%), and from Ruta chalepensis, rich in 2-undecanone (162) (Figure 35) (84.28%), showed against L. infantum promastigote forms of 0.25 and 1.13 μg/mL, respectively [143]. In addition, only Thymus hirtus sp. Algeriensis EO showed leishmanicidal activity against L. major (). On the other hand, for these two EOs, SI values (calculated as ) ranging from 0.19 to 1.57 showed inadequate antileishmanial activity by hit selection [143]. Two other EOs (from T. articulata and Lavandula multifida) were inactive against L. major promastigotes, and for the remaining six EOs, values ranged from 0.30 to 2.23 μg/mL, but with high levels of cytotoxicity () [143].

EOs from sixteen plant species belonging to various families, purchased from QUINARI Cosmetic and Fragances Inc. (Maringá, Pr, Brazil) or collected in Lavras, MG (Brazil), were evaluated for their biological potential against L. amazonensis promastigote forms after 24 h of exposure [144]. None of the EOs tested showed desirable values. For the four most effective EOs (from Matricaria chamomilla, Cordia verbenaceae, Siparuna guianensis, and Cinnamodendron dinisii species), the values ranged from 48.55 to 64.75 μg/mL and were considered moderately active or inactive. Furthermore, for all EOs tested, SI were not satisfactory (). From the chemical composition of the evaluated EOs and the and SI values, the authors compared these leishmanicidal activities and cytotoxicities with those of EOs from other plant species. Literature reports that EOs from Matricaria chamomilla showed no leishmanicidal activity against L. donovani specie. Another EO from Lantana camara, with similar major constituents (farnesene (117) derivatives as major constituents), showed significant leishmanicidal activity against L. amazonensis (), but with high cytotoxicity [145, 146]. In another example, EO from Bulnesia sarmientoi, with 48.29% of guaiol (163) (Figure 35) as its major constituent, was inactive against L. amazonensis (). However, EO from Endlicheria bracteolate, with 72.12% of guaiol (163), had an of 7.93 μg/mL against the same Leishmania species and a similar value of SI (1.91) [147]. Finally, they observed that the concentration of linalool (3) in the EO from Salvia sclarea was insufficient to promote leishmanicidal activity for this EO, since Kuźma et al. demonstrated that linalool-rich EO from the leaves of Croton cajucara promoted morphological changes in L. amazonensis promastigotes treated at concentrations of 15 ng/mL [148].

In order to explore ethnopharmacological data of copaiba oils obtained from Peru, Maranhão, and Amazonas (states in Brazil) and French Guiana which are used in folk medicine to treat leishmaniasis [149152], Santos and coworkers investigated the antiproliferative effect of EOs from eight kinds of Brazilian copaiba against promastigote and amastigote forms of L. amazonensis [153]. All copaiba oils showed some level of activity with values ranging between 5.0 and 22.0 μg/mL. The most active EO (from Copaifera reticulata, ) demonstrated effects against axenic and intracellular amastigote forms, with values of 15.0 and 20 μg/mL, respectively. With respect to cytotoxicity, this same EO showed a tolerable value of SI (8.0) to promastigote forms and an inadequate value (2.5) to axenic amastigote forms. Nevertheless, studies revealed that copaiba oil from Copaifera reticulata did not alter the viability of peritoneal macrophages at a concentration of 500 μg/mL, and the treatment at 500 mg/kg with EOs from Copaifera reticulata and Copaifera multijuga did not induce behavioral alterations, lesions, or bleeding in the stomachs of mice [154, 155].

These results involving copaiba EOs from various species led the same authors to investigate the in vivo antileishmanial activity against L. amazonensis of an EO from Copaifera martii, also using electron microscopy, biochemical analysis, and flow cytometry [156]. Infected mice were treated with copaiba oil for 30 days. After oral treatment (100 mg/kg/day), oral and topical (1 mg/mm2) treatments reduced the average lesion size in relation to the control group (75% and 72.5% reduction, respectively); however, no significant difference was observed when compared to the reference drug glucantime (79.5% reduction). Nevertheless, topical and subcutaneous (100 mg/kg/day) treatments did not show significant reduction in average lesion size, and the subcutaneous treatment caused injuries to the animal.

Histopathological and mutagenicity evaluations showed no genotoxic effects or changes in various organs in animals treated with copaiba EO compared with control animals. In addition, the following microscopic aspects of the parasite were observed: (i) promastigote forms of L. amazonensis treated with concentrations of 14 μg/mL () and 70 μg/mL (IC90) showed ultrastructural changes and swollen mitochondria, and (ii) an increase in plasma membrane permeability and depolarization of the mitochondrial membrane potential were observed in axenic amastigotes treated with 100 and 200 μg/mL (Figure 1). These results supported the notion that copaiba oil may be the source of a new drug; however, its mechanism of action still needs to be clarified [156].

The antileishmanial effects of copaiba EOs from Copaifera reticulata and Copaifera martii species against L. amazonensis led another research group to investigate the biological potential of four commercial oils from Copaifera ssp. C1-C4, β-caryophyllene-, sesquiterpene- and diterpene-rich fractions were obtained from distillation [157]. Diterpene-rich EOs (C2 and C3) were more active against L. amazonensis promastigotes. Sesquiterpene-rich EOs C1 and C4 were more potent against intracellular amastigotes, with of 2.9 and 2.3 μg/mL, respectively. In comparison with the same activity of EO from Copaifera reticulata [153], C1 and C4 EOs were 6.9- and 8.7-fold more potent, respectively. For all the compared EOs containing β-caryophyllene (22) as their major constituent, the good value (1.3 μg/mL or 6.4 μM) demonstrated by the isolated sesquiterpene suggested that this compound may directly influence the antileishmanial activity of the EOs assayed. In addition, SI values of 29.3, 40.1, and 48.9 for C1, C4, and β-caryophyllene (22), respectively, demonstrated a better ratio of efficacy to toxicity. Finally, the C4 sesquiterpene-rich fraction showed a similar antileishmanial activity against amastigote forms, probably due to the same concentration of β-caryophyllene (22) in both the EO and the fraction, and C4 diterpene-rich fraction was not active in low concentrations [157].

EOs from four plant species reported in traditional medicine in Ethiopia, Artemisia absinthium L., Artemisia abyssinica, Echinops kebericho MESFIN, and Satureja punctata, were tested against promastigote and axenic amastigote forms of L. donovani and L. aethiopica. The results demonstrated that two EOs from Artemisia absinthium L. and Echinops kebericho MESFIN possessed strong antileishmanicidal activity against promastigote ( ranging from 0.24 to 42.00 μg/mL) and axenic amastigote forms ( ranging from 0.0097 to 0.15 μg/mL) of both Leishmania species. In relation to the other two species tested, Artemisia abyssinica was inactive against the two forms of parasite, and Satureja punctata showed high cytotoxicity. Unfortunately, the great number of constituents (including mono- and sesquiterpenes, aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons, carotenoid derivatives, and oxygenated structures) that appeared to have no specific cellular targets could explain the inadequate SI values for the most active oils [158, 159].

In a recent study, Silva and colleagues evaluated the antileishmanial activity of the EO from leaves of Ocimum canum Sims. that is commonly used as an infusion or syrup for the treatment of a number of diseases. The biological results revealed that OcEO was rich in monoterpenes such as thymol (1) (42.15%), p-cymene (11) (21.17%), and γ-terpinene (64) (19.81%), demonstrating moderate activity against promastigote and intracellular amastigote forms of L. amazonensis, with values of 17.4 and 13.1 μg/mL, respectively. These values were more potent than those of the reference drug pentamidine, with satisfactory SI values (18.1 and 24.0, respectively) [157]. Electron microscopy showed that OcEO was associated with several ultrastructural alterations in promastigote forms of the parasite, including autophagosome-like structures that were multivesicular and had lipid bodies that could result in cell death, discontinuity of the nucleus membrane, and exocytic activity by the flagellar pocket [160].

EO from leaves and flowers of Achillea millefolium, species used as antihelmintic and trypanocidals, was evaluated in vitro against L. amazonensis. Significant activity was observed against promastigote and intracellular amastigote forms, with values of 7.8 and 6.5 μg/mL and acceptable SI values of 9.2 and 11.0, respectively [161]. Unfortunately, the major constituents of AmEO were not determined. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) analysis of the treated promastigote forms revealed morphological alterations in the shape and size of the parasite as well as ultrastructural alterations, including changes in the flagellar membrane, abnormal membrane structures, rupture of the plasma membrane, atypical vacuoles, myelin-like figures, and vesicles that resembled autophagic vacuoles. The mechanism of action remains unclear; however, the morphological changes observed in the parasite may be related to inhibition of two parasite enzymes: serine-protease and squalene synthase (BPQ-OH) [161].

Rosa et al. investigated the leishmanicidal effects of linalool-rich EO from leaves of Croton cajucara and purified linalool (3) [162]. Both EO and purified linalool (3) showed potent antileishmanial activity, with values of 8.3 and 4.3 ng/mL against promastigote forms and values of 22.0 and 15.5 ng/mL against the amastigote form of the parasite, respectively. SI values were not determined, but for both, the concentration of 15.0 ng/mL presented no cytotoxic effects against mammalian cells. Mitochondrial swelling and important alterations in the organization of the nuclear and kinetoplast chromatins decrease in the association between macrophages and parasites, and increases in nitric oxide levels in infected macrophages could explain the extreme toxicity of the CcEO for L. amazonensis [162].

Some studies reported that linalool (3) (oxygenated monoterpene) and eugenol (2) (phenolic compound), chemical constituents in many EOs from various plant species, as well as eugenol- and linalool-rich EOs, were fatal for several species of Leishmania [162165]. Dutra and coworkers explored the biological potential of these purified compounds in L. infantum chagasi promastigotes and axenic amastigote forms at baseline and during the infection of peritoneal mouse macrophages [166]. The estimated values for eugenol (2) and linalool (3) against axenic amastigotes forms were 220 and 550 μg/mL, respectively. The value for eugenol (2) against promastigote forms was 500 μg/mL, and for linalool (3), the value for the last parasite form was not determined. For both compounds, some of the mechanisms associated with leishmanicidal activity were confirmed: the two derivatives were able to enhance the activities of protein kinases PKC and PKA, linalool (3) decreased parasite oxygen consumption, and eugenol (2) reduced the parasite resistance to reactive oxygen species [166].

Santim et al. (2009) evaluated the effect of EO from Cymbopogon citratus and its major constituent, citral (63), against L. amazonensis. The EO showed good activity against promastigote and amastigote forms, with values of 1.7 and 3.2 μg/mL, respectively, a good SI value (14.7) for promastigotes and a tolerable value of 8.7 μg/mL against promastigote forms, with a tolerable SI of 6.3. SEM and TEM analysis revealed aberrant morphologies of the amastigote forms exposed to the EO, including disintegration of the parasite, mitochondrial swelling, exocytic projections in the flagellar pocket, swollen mitochondria, and rupture of the plasma membrane, characterized by the presence of extracellular materials [167].

Rodrigues and colleagues [139, 169] evaluated the antileishmanial potential of EOs from Eugenia uniflora L. and Syzygium cumini (L.) Skeels, and α-pinene (118), major constituents of EuEO. α-Pinene (118) was more effective than was the EO from the plant, without desirable potency ( against various forms of the parasite). The isolated compound showed moderate values (16.1 and 15.6 μg/mL against axenic and intracellular amastigote forms, respectively) and low cytotoxicity (). The mechanism of action for monoterpene was mediated by immunomodulatory activity (increase in phagocytic and lysosomal activities) and elevated NO levels. However, EO from E. uniflora showed significant antileishmanial activity, with values of 3.04 and 1.92 μg/mL against promastigote and amastigote forms, respectively, and good SI values of 14.9 and 23.9, respectively. In relation to the mechanism of action, this EO activity was not mediated by nitric oxide production, suggesting that macrophage activation may be involved in the biological activity, as demonstrated by increases in both phagocytic capacity and lysosomal activity [168, 169].

Bosquiroli et al. evaluated the antileishmanial activity of EO from Piper angustifolium. PaEO rich in sesquiterpenes such as spathulenol (108) (23.78%) and caryophyllene oxide (38) (13.06%) reduced the number of intracellular amastigotes of L. infantum with an value of 1.43 μg/mL. It was more toxic to NIH/3T3 fibroblasts and murine macrophage J774.A1, with good SI values of 33.72 and 22.5, respectively. For PpEO, the mechanism of action may be associated with increased NO release after treatment at low concentrations [170].

EOs obtained from the aerial parts of four Moroccan plant species (Lamiaceae) were screened against various Leishmania species [171173]. The EOs from Lavandula stoechas, with fenchone (166) (31.81%), camphor (14) (29.60%), and terpineol (111) (13.1%) as major constituents, exhibited strong leishmanicidal effects against two Leishmania species, whereas L. major was the most sensitive strain with an of 0.9 μg/mL, followed by L. infantum () and L. tropica (). For the EO from Origanum compactum, three phenological stages of the plant were analyzed, and the oxygenated monoterpenes were the major constituents at the three phenological stages (49.4% at vegetative stage, 62.975% at flowering stage, and 61.379% at postflowering stage). In lower quantities, other chemical classes such as sesquiterpene hydrocarbons, oxygenated sesquiterpenes, alcohols, ketones, and acids were also identified. At low concentrations, these EOs showed significant cytotoxicity against three Leishmania species, while the cytotoxic effects are not significantly variable with increasing concentrations. The L. infantum species was the most sensitive strain, with values ranging from 0.02 to 0.12 μg/mL at the three phenological stages. The other two EOs from Mentha pulegium and Rosmarinus officinalis were studied by the same authors, and both monoterpene-rich EOs were potent against L. major, L. infantum, and L. tropica species, showing values ranging from 0.36 to 2.6 μg/mL. Unfortunately, for all EOs studied, the SI values were not determined, and the relationship between efficacy and toxicity could not be measured [171173].

Essid et al. evaluated the antileishmanial activity of EOs from twelve medicinal plants from Northern Tunisia. The first group of EOs isolated from Ferula communis, Teucrium polium, and Pelargonium graveolens species displayed strong inhibitory activities against the promastigote forms ofL. major and L. infantum, showing values ranging from 0.05 to 0.28 μg/mL. The second group contained five EOs belonging to Thymus hirtus, Artemisia campestris, Myrtus communis, Artemisia herba-alba, and Alvia officinalis, exhibiting good leishmanicidal activities with values ranging from 1 to 10 μg/mL against the same species of the parasite, but with lower activity when compared with amphotericin B. In the third group, EOs from Nigella sativa, Laurus nobilis, Rosmarinus officinalis, and Eucalyptus globulus showed values up to 10 μg/mL. Purified β-caryophyllene (22), camphor (14), and carvacrol (10) were screened against the same parasite species and showed less activity when compared with the most active EOs classified as the first group. In addition, the most active EOs and purified compounds showed low cytotoxicity to macrophage cells, presenting ideal values of SI () [174].

An in vivo study was performed with the EO extracted from the leaves of Artemisia annua, which has camphor (14) (52.06%), β-caryophyllene (22) (10.95%), and 1,8-cineole (124) (5.57%) as major constituents. AaEO presented an value of 7.3 μg/mL against amastigote forms of L. donovani, but no cytotoxic effects against mammalian macrophages even at 200 μg/mL. In addition, intraperitoneal administration of the AaEO (200 mg/kg/b.w.) to infected BALB/c mice reduced the parasite burden by almost 90% in the liver and spleen, with significant reduction in weight. There was no hepatic or renal toxicity, as demonstrated by normal levels of serum enzymes [163].

Drmachi et al. (2016) evaluated the immunomodulatory effects of EO from Tetradenia riparia against L. amazonensis species. They found that TrEO induced 50% death of amastigote forms of the parasite after 24 h incubation at a concentration of 30 μg/mL. In addition, the oil did not present cytotoxicity in murine macrophages at the same concentration, with cell viability >95%. They evaluated the modulatory effects of TrEO on cytokine levels in peritoneal fluid cells that were infected with L. amazonensis. They observed inhibition of some of the most critical cytokines for parasite growth and the establishment of infection, including granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, interleukin-4 (IL-4), IL-10, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF). The parasite inhibited interferon-γ and IL-12, and the EO blocked this inhibition, indicating that these cytokines were critical for activating mechanisms associated with the death and elimination of the parasite [175].

EO from Chenopodium ambrosioides, containing carvacrol (10) (62.36%) and ascaridole (37) (22.54%) as major constituents, was investigated against L. amazonensis. CaEO showed values of 3.7 and 4.6 μg/mL against promastigote and amastigote forms, respectively, and cytotoxicity was approximately 15-fold higher for peritoneal macrophages than for both parasite forms [120]. For the promastigote form, they observed synergistic activity in conjunction with pentamidine [176], and other results showed similar activity against promastigote and amastigote forms of L. donovani, with values of 4.45 and 5.1 μg/mL, respectively [177]. An in vivo study demonstrated significant reduction in the size of the lesions in animals treated with the EO during the first 15 days of treatment. They also observedsignificant suppression of the number of parasites in the infected footpads, as compared with the burden in the footpads of the other treated mice, and oral administration at a dose of 30 mg/kg slowed the infection in an experimental model [178].

In a subsequent study, the authors observed a significant reduction in lesion size in BALB/c mice treated with the EO from C. ambrosioides compared with untreated animals at doses of 30 and 150 mg/kg by intralesional and oral routes. This activity was superior to that of the reference drugs glucantime, amphotericin B, and pentamidine, or the two major constituents carvacrol (10) and ascaridole (37) [179, 180]. This ability to control disease progression of cutaneous leishmaniasis was also observed with EO from Bixa orellana, at dose of 30 mg/kg over 14 days [181]. Finally, recent studies suggested that CaEO caused a breakdown of mitochondrial membrane potential and a modification of redox indexes [64], and the isolated compounds carvacrol (10), ascaridole (37), and caryophyllene oxide (38) mediated their leishmanicidal activity via various mitochondrial targets, including the electron transport chain, thiol depletion, and production of superoxide radical, causing significant impairment of mitochondrial coupling [182].

The chemical analysis of EO from Vanillosmopsis arborea Baker showed that α-bisabolol (165) was its main constituent (97.9%). Both VaEO and α-bisabolol (165) efficiently inhibited the growth of L. amazonensis promastigotes, with values of 7.35 and 4.95 μg/mL, respectively [183]. In addition, α-bisabolol (165) was more effective against promastigotes and intracellular amastigotes, and the cytotoxic assay against intracellular amastigotes showed that the pure compound () was less toxic than was VaEO (). These results suggested that both α-bisabolol (165) and VaEO increased cell permeability to exogenous compounds, since some sesquiterpenes can induce changes in membranes, allowing microorganisms to enter the cells, thus augmenting the microbial permeability to antimicrobial agents. The ultrastructural analysis of the parasite showed an elongated cell body and the presence of a well-defined kinetoplast and nucleus. The promastigotes treated with α-bisabolol (165) for 24 hours at 30 μg/mL showed severe cell damage with loss of parasite morphology, discontinuity of the nuclear membrane, increased mitochondrial volume and kinetoplast, and presence of vesicles with an electrondense display with lipid inclusion in the plasma membrane. However, in the same conditions of analysis for VaEO, they observed increased volumes of flagellar pockets with consequent breakage, increased volumes and changes in mitochondrial kinetoplasts, abnormal condensation of chromatin in the nucleus, discontinuity of the nuclear membrane, lipid inclusions in the presence of electrondense vesicles, and visualization of the inclusion of a lipid envelope within the plasma membrane, with the consequent loss of parasite morphology [183].

Another group evaluated the effect of (−)-α-bisabolol (165) against promastigote forms of L. infantum. In general, this sesquiterpene showed a very similar percentage of inhibition of the parasite when compared with the reference drug pentamidine (Figure 36). The value of for the compound was 10.99 μg/mL, and the presence of a hydroxyl in its structure explains its high capacity to inhibit L. infantum promastigote form. In addition, the very low toxicity in vivo supported the therapeutic use of (−)-α-bisabolol (165) to treat leishmaniasis caused by L. infantum [184, 185].

Xavier et al. explored the leishmanicidal properties of synthesized compounds derived from the oxygenated monoterpenes eugenol (2), thymol (1), and carvacrol (10), by molecular hybridation with nitrated Morita-Baylis-Hillman adducts (MBHAs) [184]. The general structure and values of the most potent hybrid compounds against L. amazonensis promastigote forms are shown in Figure 37. Hybrid compounds 180, 181, and 182 exhibited the best antileishmanial activity, with values ranging from 4.71 to 8.75 μg/mL, and (except for derivative 3, which was not determined). In addition, the compounds substituted with nitro groups at the ortho position were more bioactive than the meta and para nitroaryl isomers. Experimental and in silico studies indicated that the mechanism of action was connected to nitro group reduction that generated RNO−• [186].

Ten chemical constituents of EOs, including nine monoterpenes and one phenylpropanoid, were investigated as antileishmanial agents against promastigote forms of L. amazonensis [187]. Among the monoterpenes evaluated, the positional isomers carvacrol (10) and thymol (1) that presented a phenolic moiety were the most active compounds, showing moderate antiparasitic activity, with values of 25.4 and 26.8 μg/mL, respectively. This result suggests that the position of the hydroxyl group in the aromatic ring did not influence the antileishmanial activity. For eugenol (2), a hydrogen bond between hydroxyl and o-methoxyl groups reduced the release of protons by the OH group, and the acidity of this group may play an important role in the potency of the compounds. In addition, for this series of compounds, the absence of aromatic hydroxyls caused compounds to be less potent, as observed for p-cymene (11) and menthol (130) with values of up to 198.9 μg/mL.

In the same study, the value found for carvacrol (10) was different from values reported in the literature for L. chagasi and L. amazonensis promastigotes ( [56] and 28.0 [56], and 15.3 μg/mL [188], respectively). Drug-parasite incubation (24-72 h) and assay methods may explain these differences between values of . For thymol, similar activity was observed by de Medeiros et al., who reported an value of 22.6 μg/mL. values ranging from 9.8 to 65.2 μg/mL were found for other species of Leishmania [56, 188, 189]. Both eugenol (2) and thymol (1) compounds showed low cytotoxicity at concentrations of 50 and 100 μg/mL, where the percentage of viability on L929 fibroblasts ranged from 46.1 to 64.5%.

1.4. Essentials Oils Active against Arboviruses, Especially Dengue

Arboviruses (arthopod-borne viruses) are viral diseases transmitted to humans by arthropods (insect and arachnid). Among the vectors, one that stands out is the mosquito Aedes aegypti, which every year transmits diseases to more than 700 million people worldwide. According to the World Health Organization, it causes more death than any other arboviral disease, killing about 2.5% of all affected children [201].

Aedys aegypti is a carrier of various diseases, including dengue fever, dengue haemorrhagic fever, chikungunya, yellow fever, and even Zika virus [202]. Yellow fever, dengue, and Zika virus have their greatest focus in tropical and subtropical areas [203], while dengue haemorrhagic fever has a greater number of reports in Asia, Thailand, and Indonesia [202].

In recent decades, the spread of dengue has increased worldwide, and in 2012 it was considered the most important viral disease in the world, with more than 100 countries and more than 2.5 billion people (about 40% of the world population) at risk of infection by some mosquito-borne disease. Of this total population, approximately 50-100 million are infected annually, of which 500 thousand cases are considered of greater severity [204, 205]

The mosquito transmits arboviruses through the blood meals of the female. The life cycle consists of egg, larva, pulp, and adult. Eggs are deposited on the walls of any reservoirs containing water, and the ideal temperature range for hatching is 28-33°C; larval and pupal stages take place in the water. The transition phase from larval to pupa lasts 24 hours, and the pupal phase lasts 48 hours until the adult mosquito appears. When adults appear, it takes a few seconds for the stiffening of chitin that allows them to fly [206].

Treatment of dengue, chikungunya, and Zika virus are symptomatic, and vaccines are not yet available. Currently, the only effective way to control these diseases is by breaking the disease transmission cycle, controlling the mosquito population through the use of biological and/or synthetic insecticides and repellents.

In several public health programs, various larvicides and insecticides currently used are effective in eliminating mosquitoes and larvae, including the organophosphates temephos [204] and pyrethroids [207]. However, their continuous use has allowed some mosquitoes to become resistant [204], and the insecticides are not selective, causing damage to other organisms, including humans [205, 208210]. Temephos, for example, was monitored in 16 countries between 1960 and 2000. It was observed that the agent was active from 48 to 72 hours in water, and it interfered with the viability of other living organisms (in addition to A. aegypti), causing serious environmental impact [206].

Currently, in Brazil temephos 1% and Bti (an efficient bioinsecticide) are both used. Bti does not present the same environmental impact as does temephos; however, its high cost makes its general use impossible [206].

In this scenario, it is necessary to identify new larvicides with various modes of action to reduce the development of mechanisms of resistance to pesticides, thereby bolstering public health system efforts [204].

The use of biological agents such as EOs is an alternative to synthetic insecticides, with good selectivity to the target and low toxicity to other organisms and the environment [206, 211, 212].

The use of biological agents has been gaining great prominence, reaching the point of a single review article compiling the larvicidal activity of 361 EOs from 269 plant species. Among these, more than 60% were considered active, with [204].

Knowing that it is easier to interfere with the proliferation of Aedes aegypti in the larval phase than in the adult phase [208], several EOs are being studied and have already shown to have relevant larvicidal activity, with advantages over synthetic insecticides. Among these advantages, the following stand out: lower risks of allergy, less irritability to the skin, less encephalopathy in children [202], more pleasant odors [201], less toxicity to humans, animals, plant life and other organisms [203], and biodegradable properties [206]. In these terms, EOs are superior for the control of arboviruses [204].

In this context, several authors reported activity of EOs and their phytoconstituents in the control of Aedes aegypti adults and larvae. A summary of these studies is presented in Table 3.


ClassesChemical Structure of isolated or synthesized compoundReference

Monoterpene hydrocarbons3-Carene (119)10.7 μg/mL[213]
150 ppm[214]
25.3 μg/mL[215]
α-Terpinene (183)
14.7 μg/mL[213]
14.7 μg/mL[216]
28.1 μg/mL[215]
γ-Terpinene (64)37.2 μg/mL[213]
30.7 μg/mL[216]
26.8 μg/mL[215]
56 ppm[214]
p-Cymene (11)43.3 μg/mL[213]
51 ppm[217]
23.3 ppm[218]
19.2 μg/mL[216]
37.1 μg/mL[215]
β-Pinene (39)183.8 μg/mL[213]
R-Limonene (8)27 ppm[214]
17.8 μL L−1[219]
S-Limonene (8)30 ppm[214]
33.9 ppm[220]
13 μL L−1[219]
RS-Limonene (8)517 ppm[214]
18.1 μg/mL[216]
β-Myrcene (61)35.8 μg/mL[215]
120.3 ppm[221]
α-Pinene (118)>50 μg/mL[216]
79.1 μg/mL[215]
Terpinolene (141)28.4 μg/mL[216]
32.1 μg/mL[215]
α-Phellandrene (143)39.3 μg/mL−1[222]
16.6 μg/mL[216]
Camphene (15)>400 μg/mL[213]
(−)-Camphene (15)220 ppm[217]
(+)-Camphene (15)406 ppm[217]

Oxygenated monoterpenes(−)-α-Terpineol (111)>400 μg/mL[213]
>50 μg/mL[216]
(−)-Terpinen-4-ol (103)>400 μg/mL[213]
>50 μg/mL[216]
>100 μg/mL[215]
Thymol (1)81 ppm[217]
17.5 ppm[218]
13.9 ppm[223]
Carvacrol (10)69 ppm[217]
20.13 ppm[223]
Borneol (112)610 ppm[217]
Isoborneol (178)598 ppm[217]
Camphor (14)657 ppm[217]
R-Carvone (13)152 ppm[217]
129.1 ppm[217]
S-Carvone (13)124 ppm[217]
RS-Carvone (13)118 ppm[214]
Isopulegol (184)
297 ppm[214]
Neoisopulegol (185)
554 ppm[214]
Menthol (130)404 ppm[214]
Menthone (132)508 ppm[214]
1,2-Carvone oxide (186)
219 ppm[214]
(+)-Pulegone (128)188.1 ppm[220]
1,4-Cineole (187)
751 ppm[217]
1,8-Cineole (124)1419 ppm[217]
>100 μg/mL−1[222]
>50 μg/mL[216]
5-Norbornene-2,2-dimethanol (188)
785 ppm[217]
5-Norbornene-2-endo,3-endo-dimethanol (189)
1407 ppm[217]
5-Norbornene-2-exo,3-exo-dimethanol (190)
717 ppm[217]
5-Norbornene-2-ol (191)
759 ppm[217]
(1R,2R,5R)-2-Methyl-5-(1-methylethenyl)-3-oxo-cyclohex-anecarbonitrile
412 ppm[214]
Carvacrol methyl ether (192)
40.6 ppm[223]
Umbellulone (158)32.3 ppm[221]
Vanillin (193)
513 ppm[217]
α-Terpinyl acetate (194)
>50 μg/mL[216]
Rotundifolone (88)62.5 ppm[220]
Pulegone epoxide (195)
1116.2 ppm[220]
(−)-Carvone epoxide (196)
217.5 ppm[220]
(+)-Carvone epoxide (197)
254.6 ppm[220]
(+)-Limonene epoxide (90)525.0 ppm[220]
(−)-Limonene epoxide (90)522.5 ppm[220]
(−)-Perill aldehyde (92)115.8 ppm[220]
Perillaldehyde epoxide (198)
715.1 ppm[220]
trans-Isopulegone (199)
538.8 ppm[220]
trans-dihydrocarvone (200)
361.3 ppm[220]
Hydroxycarvone (199)
1470.9 ppm[220]
Hydroxydihydrocarvone (200)
1628.2 ppm[220]
Acetoxycarvotanacetone (201)
230.7 ppm[220]

Oxygenated sesquiterpenesElemol (52)>100 μg/mL[215]
β-Eudesmol (59)>50 μg/mL[224]
>100 μg/mL[215]

Diterpenes16-Kaurene (202)
57 μg/mL[213]
57.0 μg/ml[217]

PhenylpropanoidsEstragole (74)46.4 μL L−1[219]
Eugenol (2)88 ppm[217]
93.3 ppm[224]
71.9 ppm[224]
23.4 ppm[223]
1-Acetate-2-methoxy-4-(2-propen-1-yl)-phenol
113.3 ppm[224]
107.7 ppm[224]
1-Propanoate-2-methoxy-4-(2-propen-1-yl)-phenol
97.2 ppm[224]
62.3 ppm[224]
1-Benzoate-2-methoxy-4-(2-propen-1-yl)-phenol
706.8 ppm[224]
723.2 ppm[224]
1-Benzoate-2-methoxy-4-(3-hydroxypropyl)-phenol
166 ppm[224]
151.1 ppm[224]
1,2-Dimethoxy-4-(2-propen-1-yl)-benzene
107.3 ppm[224]
101.4 ppm[224]
1-Ethoxy-2-methoxy-4-(2-propen-1-yl)-benzene
67.2 ppm[224]
76.4 ppm[224]
1-{[(1,1-Dimethylethyl)dimethylsilyl]oxy}-2-methoxy-4-(2-propen-1-yl)-benzene
278.9 ppm[224]
274.5 ppm[224]
4-Hydroxy-3-methoxy-benzenepropanol
1415.1 ppm[224]
1614.9 ppm[224]
2-[2-Methoxy-4-(2-propen-1-yl)phenoxy] acetic acid
295.9 ppm[224]
240.7 ppm[224]
Methyleugenol (171)36.5 ppm[221]
trans-Anethole (153)29.3 μL L−1[219]

OthersPhenol (203)
194 ppm[217]
1-Dodecanol (204)
5.2 ppm[221]
1-Tridecanol (205)
2.1 ppm[221]
Allyl cis-1-propenyl disulfide
15.35 ppm[225]
Allyl methyl disulfide
>200 ppm[225]
>200 ppm[26]
Allyl methyl trisulfide
>200 ppm[225]
Dimethyl tetrasulfide
>200 ppm[226]
Dimethyl trisulfide
>200 ppm[225]
>200 ppm[226]
Dipropyl trisulfide
>200 ppm[225]
>200 ppm[226]
Methlyl propyl trisulfide
19.38 ppm[226]
Catechol (206)
243 ppm[217]
Guaiacol (207)
177 ppm[217]
Resorcinol (208)
577 ppm[217]
Salicylaldehyde (209)
137 ppm[217]

Most of the studies, while identifying the constituents of the EO, restricted the experiments of biological activity to the oil itself, with few studies evaluating the activity of each individual substance. In some cases, only the activity of the compounds with the highest concentration was evaluated. This is primarily due to the high cost of these compounds, when they are available for purchase [208].

The monoterpenes were the most tested compounds, especially oxygenated monoterpenes, corresponding to 38% () of the compounds shown in Table 3. The monoterpene hydrocarbon class presented the best activity. This group included 3-carene (119) ( and 25.3 μg/mL), α-terpinene (182) (), and limonene (8) (), among others.

Knowing the isolated constituents of the EOs and their activity allowed the execution of chemical analysis and quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR), which identifies characteristics related to the structure of the compound that describe the biological activity, making possible the design of new promising compounds.

One study conducted a consensus principal component analysis (CPCA) and principal component analysis (PCA), identifying characteristics related to hydrophobicity (LogS, DRY, and H2O) of thymol (1) and carvacrol (10) derivatives that were important to explain the activities of the compounds against larva of Aedes aegypti [227]. Another study performed CPCA and PCA in a series of 55 substances isolated from EOs, obtaining similar results. They highlighted the importance of hydrophobicity (DRY and H2O) for the activity of these compounds against the larva of Aedes aegypti; however, steric characteristics were also important to explain this activity, indicating that these characteristics were crucial to the activity of these substances, based on the evaluated compounds [228].

2. Conclusions

In this work, a large number of papers that dealt with the use of EOs, their fractions, and/or their chemical constituents as treatment options for some neglected diseases were reviewed. Despite the full knowledge that mankind makes use of plants for medicinal purposes from its origin, the absence of new effective drugs, with fewer side effects that can be used against resistant strains of the parasites, promotes a strong demand for natural products, especially for the poorest and most affected populations that are continuously under risk of these diseases. Several EOs and chemical constituents were identified, which have biological activities equipotential to those of the few commercial drugs available, with good margins of safety, suggesting that popular use cannot be neglected.

As examples for isolated active compounds against T. cruzi, the isolated compounds thymol (1) and linalool (3) showed similar activity when compared with benznidazole and quantified activity in nanomolar concentrations, respectively. In addition, semisynthetic aphidicolin (28) derivatives (diterpenes) exhibited high potency and selectivity against the same parasite.

For EOs with anti-T. brucei activity, the isolated compounds rotundifolone (88) and (−)-perillyl aldehyde (92) were slightly less active than the reference drug suramin, and carvacrol (10), ascaridole (37), and caryophyllene oxides (38) showed strong potential to growth inhibition of the parasite, with activity comparable to the same standard drug. In addition, some EOs and isolated compounds demonstrated promising antitrypanosomal activity and high selectivity index values, specially the compounds carlina oxide (139) (isolated from Carlina acaulis roots), linalool (3) (which exhibited potential activity against different trypanosome species), and C. nardus EO (rich in oxygenated monoterpenes), which demonstrated values ranged from 0.31 to 2.5 μg/mL and high selectivity index (>40).

For antileishmanial activity, several EOs or isolated compounds were active against the parasite (). Some of them promoted morphological alterations in the parasite, but few showed a great ratio of efficacy to toxicity. Linalool-rich EO (from Croton cajucara) and purified linalool (3) showed potent antileishmanial activity at nanomolar concentration, promoting morphological changes in the parasite, as well as decreased parasite oxygen consumption and enhances the activities of the protein kinases and increases in nitric oxide levels in infected macrophages, confirming some of the mechanisms associated with leishmanicidal activity. Another isolated compound identified as α-bisabolol (165) (main constituent of EO from Vanillosmopsis arborea) efficiently inhibited the growth of promastigotes and amastigotes forms of the same parasite, inducing several ultrastructural alterations and severe cell damage in the parasite, where the very similar percentage of inhibition (compared with pentamidine) and very low toxicity in vivo supported their therapeutic use to treat leishmaniasis.

Other EOs rich in spathulenol (108) and caryophyllene oxide (38) (from Piper angustifolium) and citral (63) (from Cymbopogon citratus) showed potential activity against promastigote and amastigote forms of the parasite and good SI values.

For control of Aedes aegypti adults and larvae, some monoterpene hydrocarbon EOs, specially 3-carene (119), α-terpinene (182), and limonene (8), exhibited the best activity.

In this sense, knowledge of the chemical structures of these phytochemicals may allow them to serve as scaffolds for rational drug design, suggesting chemical modifications to increase activity, bioavailability, and toxicity, among other characteristics, allowing the design of new and more active compounds.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the financial support from the Brazilian agency CNPq and from State University of Paraiba (UEPB). F.J.B.M.J. is granted by Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) PQ #308590/2017-1. E.C.L. and R.S.A.A. are granted by FAPESQ-CNPQ (fellowships).

Supplementary Materials

Figure S1: plant families and number of OEs evaluated between the years 2000 and 2018 against at least one species of Leishmania. Figure S2: plant families and the number of active EOs (IC50 ≤ 10 μg/mL) against at least one Leishmania species and parasite form. Table S1: inactive or moderated active EOs against Leishmania species. (Supplementary Materials)

References

  1. WHO/Department of control of neglected tropical diseases, Sustaining the Drive to Overcome the Global Impact of Neglected Tropical Diseases: Second WHO Report on Neglected Diseases, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland, 2012.
  2. WHO, First Who Report Neglected Tropical Diseases: Working to Overcome the Global Impact Neglected Tropical Diseases, WHO/HTMA/NTD/2010, Geneve, Switzerland, 2018, http://www.who.int/neglected_diseases/2010report/en/.
  3. F. J. B. Mendonça Junior, “Chapter 1: “As doenças negligenciadas e seu contexto no Brasil”,” in Doenças Negligenciadas Sob a ótica da Quimica Medicinal, pp. 11–26, CRV, Curitiba/Parana, Brazil, 1st edition edition, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. M. C. Yazbek, “Pobreza no Brasil contemporâneo e formas de seu enfrentamento,” Serviço Social & Sociedade, vol. 110, no. 110, pp. 288–322, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. S. S. d. Assis and T. C. Araujo-Jorge, “O que dizem as propostas curriculares do Brasil sobre o tema saúde e as doenças negligenciadas?: aportes para a educação em saúde no ensino de ciências,” Ciência & Educação, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 125–140, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. B. Nikolay, C. S. Mwandawiro, J. H. Kihara et al., “Understanding heterogeneity in the impact of national neglected tropical disease control programmes: evidence from school-based deworming in Kenya,” PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, vol. 9, no. 9, article e0004108, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. P. J. Hotez, “The giant anteater in the room: Brazil’s neglected tropical diseases problem,” PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, vol. 2, no. 1, p. e177, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. R. Siqueira-Batista and F. R. Schramm, “A saúde entre a iniqüidade e a justiça: contribuições da igualdade complexa de Amartya Sen,” Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 129–142, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. B. L. A. d. ANDRADE and D. G. ROCHA, “Há equidade na produção do conhecimento sobre as doenças negligenciadas no Brasil?” Tempus Actas de Saúde Coletiva, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 21–34, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. V. I. Avelino-Silva and J. F. Ramos, “Arboviroses e políticas públicas no Brasil/Arboviruses and public policies in Brazil,” Revista Ciências Em Saúde, vol. 7, no. 3, p. 1, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. L. C. Almeida Filho, P. M. Tabosa, D. C. Hissa, I. M. Vasconcelos, and A. F. Carvalho, “First insights into insecticidal activity against Aedes aegypti and partial biochemical characterization of a novel low molecular mass chymotrypsin-trypsin inhibitor purified from Lonchocarpus sericeus seeds,” Pest Management Science, vol. 74, no. 6, pp. 1362–1373, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. I. R. Barbosa, A. M. Tavares, Ú. P. S. Torres et al., “Identificação de áreas prioritárias para a vigilância e controle de dengue e outras arboviroses transmitidas pelo Aedes aegypti no município de Natal-RN: relato de experiência,” Epidemiologia e Serviços de Saúde, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 629–638, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. K. M. Arantes and B. B. Pereira, “Levantamento, análise e seleção de indicadores ambientais e socioeconômicos como subsídio para o fortalecimento das estratégias de controle da dengue no município de Uberlândia-MG,” Journal of Health & Biological Sciences, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 86–95, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. T. Honorato, P. P. A. Lapa, C. M. M. Sales et al., “Spatial analysis of distribution of dengue cases in Espírito Santo, Brazil, in 2010: use of Bayesian model,” Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia, vol. 17, Supplement 2, pp. 150–159, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  15. C. A. S. F. Miranda, M. d. G. Cardoso, L. R. Batista, L. M. A. Rodrigues, and A. C. d. S. Figueiredo, “Essential oils from leaves of various species: antioxidant and antibacterial properties on growth in pathogenic species,” Revista Ciência Agronômica, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 213–220, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. L. Scotti, F. J. B. Mendonça Júnior, M. S. Silva, and M. T. Scotti, “4. Drug design applied to natural products against neglected diseases,” in Chemical Drug Design, G. K. Gupta and V. Kumar, Eds., pp. 53–86, De Gruyter, Berlin, Boston, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. P. L. Crowell, “Prevention and therapy of cancer by dietary monoterpenes,” The Journal of Nutrition, vol. 129, no. 3, pp. 775S–778S, 1999. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. S. L. N. Kamte, F. Ranjbarian, G. D. Campagnaro et al., “Trypanosoma brucei inhibition by essential oils from medicinal and aromatic plants traditionally used in Cameroon (Azadirachta indica, Aframomum melegueta, Aframomum daniellii, Clausena anisata, Dichrostachys cinerea and Echinops giganteus),” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 14, no. 7, p. 737, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. C. M. O. Simões, E. P. Schenkel, G. Gosmann, J. C. P. Mello, L. A. Mentz, and P. R. Petrovick, “Farmacognosia da planta ao medicamento,” Tech. Rep., Porto Alegre: Editora da UFRGS and UFSC, Florianópolis, 2010. View at: Google Scholar
  20. A. A. Craveiro and M. I. L. D. Machado, “Aromas, insetos e plantas,” Ciência Hoje, vol. 4, no. 23, pp. 54–63, 1986. View at: Google Scholar
  21. G. Benelli, “Research in mosquito control: current challenges for a brighter future,” Parasitology Research, vol. 114, no. 8, pp. 2801–2805, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. G. Benelli and H. Mehlhorn, “Declining malaria, rising of dengue and Zika virus: insights for mosquito vector control,” Parasitology Research, vol. 115, no. 5, pp. 1747–1754, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  23. A. Silva-Santos, H. R. Bizzo, A. M. Antunes, and I. A. D’avila, “A proteção patentária na utilização de óleos essenciais e compostos terpênicos para o desenvolvimento tecnológico e industrial,” Revista Brasileira de Plantas Medicinais, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 14–22, 2006. View at: Google Scholar
  24. C. M. d. M. Sousa, H. R. e. Silva, G. M. Vieira-Jr et al., “Fenóis totais e atividade antioxidante de cinco plantas medicinais,” Química Nova, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 351–355, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. F. Solórzano-Santos and M. G. Miranda-Novales, “Essential oils from aromatic herbs as antimicrobial agents,” Current Opinion in Biotechnology, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 136–141, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  26. M. Fazolin, J. L. V. Estrela, V. Catani, M. R. Alécio, and M. S. Lima, “Propriedade inseticida dos óleos essenciais de Piper hispidinervum C. DC.; Piper aduncum L. e Tanaecium nocturnum (Barb. Rodr.) Bur. & K. Shum sobre Tenebrio molitor L., 1758,” Ciência e Agrotecnologia, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 113–120, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. A. C. R. L. Pereira, J. V. d. Oliveira, M. G. C. Gondim Junior, and C. A. G. d. Câmara, “Atividade inseticida de óleos essenciais e fixos sobre Callosobruchus maculatus (FABR., 1775) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) em grãos de caupi [Vigna unguiculata (L.) WALP.],” Ciência e Agrotecnologia, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 717–724, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. A. C. T. d. Campos, L. L. Radunz, A. L. Radünz, A. J. Mossi, R. G. Dionello, and S. L. Ecker, “Atividade repelente e inseticida do óleo essencial de carqueja doce sobre o caruncho do feijão,” Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental, vol. 18, no. 8, pp. 861–865, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. P. J. C. Sousa, C. A. L. Barros, J. C. S. Rocha, D. S. Lira, G. M. Monteiro, and J. G. S. Maia, “Avaliação toxicológica do óleo essencial de Piper aduncum L,” Revista Brasileira de Farmacognosia, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 217–221, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. G. L. P. Gonçalves, L. P. Ribeiro, L. Gimenes et al., “Lethal and sublethal toxicities of Annona sylvatica (Magnoliales: Annonaceae) extracts to Zabrotes subfasciatus (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Bruchinae),” Florida Entomologist, vol. 98, no. 3, pp. 921–928, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. T. I. d. Silva, A. C. L. Alves, F. R. Azevedo, C. A. Marco, H. R. Santos, and W. S. Alves, “Efeito larvicida de óleos essenciais de plantas medicinais sobre larvas de Aedes aegypti L. (Diptera: Culicidae),” Revista Verde de Agroecologia e Desenvolvimento Sustentável, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 256–261, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. C. S. Teixeira, C. C. Nunes, R. Vargas, J. R. de Carvalho, and H. B. Zago, “Toxicidade de óleos essenciais para o controle de Tetranychus urticae KOCH, 1836 (Acari: tetranychidae),” Revista Univap, vol. 22, no. 40, pp. 843–843, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. A. L. de Sene Amâncio Zara, S. M. dos Santos, E. S. Fernandes-Oliveira, R. G. Carvalho, and G. E. Coelho, “Estratégias de controle do Aedes aegypti: uma revisão,” Epidemiologia e Serviços de Saúde, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 1-2, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. D. G. d. R. Voris, C. H. V. Afonso, C. A. C. A. Filho et al., “Estudos Etnofarmacológicos de óelos essenciais com atividade larvicida contra o Mosquito Aedes Aegypt,” Semioses, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 86–94, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. R. Torres-Martínez, Y. M. García-Rodríguez, P. Ríos-Chávez et al., “Antioxidant activity of the essential oil and its major terpenes of Satureja macrostema (Moc. and Sessé ex Benth.) Briq,” Pharmacognosy Magazine, vol. 13, Supplement 4, pp. S875–S880, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  36. E. González-Burgos and M. P. Gómez-Serranillos, “Terpene compounds in nature: a review of their potential antioxidant activity,” Current Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 19, no. 31, pp. 5319–5341, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  37. A. Khan, A. Ahmad, F. Akhtar et al., “Induction of oxidative stress as a possible mechanism of the antifungal action of three phenylpropanoids,” FEMS Yeast Research, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 114–122, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  38. H. S. Camargos, R. A. Moreira, S. A. Mendanha, K. S. Fernandes, M. L. Dorta, and A. Alonso, “Terpenes increase the lipid dynamics in the Leishmania plasma membrane at concentrations similar to their IC50 values,” PLoS One, vol. 9, no. 8, article e104429, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  39. S. A. Mendanha and A. Alonso, “Effects of terpenes on fluidity and lipid extraction in phospholipid membranes,” Biophysical Chemistry, vol. 198, pp. 45–54, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  40. J. Bero, S. Kpoviessi, and J. Quetin-Leclercq, “Anti-parasitic activity of essential oils and their active constituents against Plasmodium, Trypanosoma and Leishmania,” in Novel Plant Bioresources: Applications in Food, Medicine and Cosmetics, A. Gurib-Fakim, Ed., John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  41. J. A. Pérez-Molina and I. Molina, “Chagas disease,” The Lancet, vol. 391, no. 10115, pp. 82–94, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  42. World Health Organization, “Investing to overcome the global impact of neglected tropical diseases,” WHO Third Report on Neglected Tropical Diseases 2015, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland, May 2018, http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/152781/1/9789241564861_eng.pdf. View at: Google Scholar
  43. G. Zanusso Junior, M. Massago, D. Kian, and M. J. O. Toledo, “Efficacy of essential oil of Syzygium aromaticum alone and in combination with benznidazole on murine oral infection with Trypanosoma cruzi IV,” Experimental Parasitology, vol. 185, pp. 92–97, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  44. S. R. Johann, R. U. Joahan, B. Ríos et al., “Actividad antiparasitaria de plantas medicinales de la Amazonía Peruana,” Biofarbo, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 23–33, 2009. View at: Google Scholar
  45. E. Izumi, T. Ueda-Nakamura, V. F. Veiga Jr, A. C. Pinto, and C. V. Nakamura, “Terpenes from Copaifera demonstrated in vitro antiparasitic and synergic activity,” Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 2994–3001, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  46. D. S. Alviano, A. L. S. Barreto, F. A. Dias et al., “Conventional therapy and promising plant-derived compounds against trypanosomatid parasites,” Frontiers in Microbiology, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 283–293, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  47. F. Bakkali, S. Averbeck, D. Averbeck, and M. Idaomar, “Biological effects of essential oils – a review,” Food and Chemical Toxicology, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 446–475, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  48. J. Cardoso and M. J. Soares, “In vitro effects of citral on Trypanosoma cruzi metacyclogenesis,” Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, vol. 105, no. 8, pp. 1026–1032, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  49. M. d. G. F. de Medeiros, A. C. da Silva, A. M. d. G. L. Citó et al., “In vitro antileishmanial activity and cytotoxicity of essential oil from Lippia sidoides Cham,” Parasitology International, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 237–241, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  50. A. O. dos Santos, T. Ueda-Nakamura, B. P. Dias Filho, V. F. da Veiga Junior, and C. V. Nakamura, “Copaiba oil: an alternative to development of new drugs against Leishmaniasis,” Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, vol. 2012, Article ID 898419, 7 pages, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  51. F. B. Holetz, T. Ueda-Nakamura, B. P. Dias-Filho, D. A. G. Cortez, J. C. P. Mello, and C. V. Nakamura, “Effect of plant extracts used in folk medicine on cell growth and differentiation of Herpetomonas samuelpessoai (Kinetoplastida, Trypanosomatidae) cultivated in defined medium,” Acta Scientiarum, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 657–662, 2002. View at: Google Scholar
  52. F. B. Holetz, T. Ueda-Nakamura, B. P. Filho, D. A. Cortez, J. A. Morgado-Diaz, and C. V. Nakamura, “Effect of essential oil of Ocimum gratissimum on the Trypanosomatid Herpetomonas samuelpessoai,” Acta Protozoologica, vol. 42, pp. 269–276, 2003. View at: Google Scholar
  53. G. F. Santoro, M. das Graças Cardoso, L. G. L. Guimarães, A. P. S. P. Salgado, R. F. S. Menna-Barreto, and M. J. Soares, “Effect of oregano (Origanum vulgare L.) and thyme (Thymus vulgaris L.) essential oils on Trypanosoma cruzi (Protozoa: Kinetoplastida) growth and ultrastructure,” Parasitology Research, vol. 100, no. 4, pp. 783–790, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  54. G. F. Santoro, M. G. Cardoso, L. G. L. Guimarães, L. Z. Mendonça, and M. J. Soares, “Trypanosoma cruzi: activity of essential oils from Achillea millefolium L., Syzygium aromaticum L. and Ocimum basilicum L. on epimastigotes and trypomastigotes,” Experimental Parasitology, vol. 116, no. 3, pp. 283–290, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  55. R. F. S. Menna-Barreto, G. A. T. Laranja, M. C. C. Silva et al., “Anti-Trypanosoma cruzi activity of Pterodon pubescens seed oil: geranylgeraniol as the major bioactive component,” Parasitology Research, vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 111–117, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  56. P. Escobar, S. Milena Leal, L. V. Herrera, J. R. Martinez, and E. Stashenko, “Chemical composition and antiprotozoal activities of Colombian Lippia spp essential oils and their major components,” Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, vol. 105, no. 2, pp. 184–190, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  57. J. Rojas, H. Solís, and O. Palacios, “Evaluación in vitro de la actividad anti Trypanosoma cruzi de aceites esenciales de diez plantas medicinales,” Anales de la Facultad de Medicina, vol. 71, no. 3, p. 161, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  58. J. Rojas, S. Ronceros, O. Palacios, and C. Sevilla, “Efecto anti-Trypanosoma cruzi del aceite esencial de Cymbopogon citratus (DC) Stapf (hierba luisa) en ratones Balb/c,” Anales de la Facultad de Medicina, vol. 73, no. 1, p. 7, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  59. J. Rojas, O. Palacios, and S. Ronceros, “Efecto del aceite esencial de aloysia triphylla britton (cedrón) sobre el Trypanosoma cruzi en ratones,” Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 61–68, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  60. T. G. Santos, R. A. Rebelo, E. M. Dalmarco et al., “Composição química e avaliação da atividade antimicrobiana do óleo essencial das folhas de Piper malacophyllum (C. PRESL.) C. DC,” Química Nova, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 477–481, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  61. A. R. Borges, J. R. A. Aires, T. M. M. Higino et al., “Trypanocidal and cytotoxic activities of essential oils from medicinal plants of Northeast of Brazil,” Experimental Parasitology, vol. 132, no. 2, pp. 123–128, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  62. V. Esperandim, D. da Silva Ferreira, K. Sousa Rezende et al., “In vitro antiparasitic activity and chemical composition of the essential oil obtained from the fruits of Piper cubeba,” Planta Medica, vol. 79, no. 17, pp. 1653–1655, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  63. C. M. O. Azeredo, T. G. Santos, B. H. L. N. S. Maia, and M. J. Soares, “In vitro biological evaluation of eight different essential oils against Trypanosoma cruzi, with emphasis on Cinnamomum verum essential oil,” BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, vol. 14, no. 1, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  64. L. Monzote, M. García, J. Pastor et al., “Essential oil from Chenopodium ambrosioides and main components: activity against Leishmania, their mitochondria and other microorganisms,” Experimental Parasitology, vol. 136, pp. 20–26, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  65. M. A. Andrade, M. G. Cardoso, M. S. Gomes et al., “Biological activity of the essential oils from Cinnamodendron dinisii and Siparuna guianensis,” Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 189–194, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  66. E. Guenther, Individual Essential Oils of the Plant Families Rutaceae and Labiatae, E. Robert, Ed., vol. 3, Krieger Publishing Company, Inc., New York, NY, USA, 1975.
  67. L. Barros, A. Duarte, M. Morais-Braga et al., “Chemical characterization and trypanocidal, leishmanicidal and cytotoxicity potential of Lantana camara L. (Verbenaceae) essential oil,” Molecules, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 209–218, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  68. M. V. O. Barros de Alencar, J. M. de Castro e Sousa, H. M. L. Rolim et al., “Diterpenes as lead molecules against neglected tropical diseases,” Phytotherapy Research, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 175–201, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  69. G. B. Santos, R. Krogh, L. G. Magalhaes, A. D. Andricopulo, M. T. Pupo, and F. S. Emery, “Semisynthesis of new Aphidicolin derivatives with high activity against Trypanosoma cruzi,” Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1205–1208, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  70. M. T. Varela, R. Z. Dias, L. F. Martins et al., “Gibbilimbol analogues as antiparasitic agents — synthesis and biological activity against Trypanosoma cruzi and Leishmania (L.) infantum,” Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1180–1183, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  71. M. T. Varela, M. L. Lima, M. K. Galuppo et al., “New alkenyl derivative from Piper malacophyllum and analogues: antiparasitic activity against Trypanosoma cruzi and Leishmania infantum,” Chemical Biology & Drug Design, vol. 90, no. 5, pp. 1007–1011, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  72. L. I. Oliveira de Souza, P. C. Bezzera-Silva, D. M. do Amaral Ferraz Navarro et al., “The chemical composition and trypanocidal activity of volatile oils from Brazilian Caatinga plants,” Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, vol. 96, pp. 1055–1064, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  73. L. H. Villamizar, M. G. Cardoso, J. Andrade et al., “Linalool, a Piper aduncum essential oil component, has selective activity against Trypanosoma cruzi trypomastigote forms at 4°C,” Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, vol. 112, no. 2, pp. 131–139, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  74. D. Steverding, “The development of drugs for treatment of sleeping sickness: a historical review,” Parasites & Vectors, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 15, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  75. World Health Organization (WHO), “World Health Statistic,” 2011, http://www.who.int/whosis/whostat/2011/en/index.html. View at: Google Scholar
  76. J. E. Donelson, “Antigenic variation and the African trypanosome genome,” Acta Tropica, vol. 85, no. 3, pp. 391–404, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  77. P. Cattand, J. Jannin, and P. Lucas, “Sleeping sickness surveillance: an essential step towards elimination,” Tropical Medicine & International Health, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 348–361, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  78. World Health Organisation (WHO), “African trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness),” 2012, http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs259/en/. View at: Google Scholar
  79. D. Malvy and F. Chappuis, “Sleeping sickness,” Clinical Microbiology and Infection, vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 986–995, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  80. P. Holmes, “Tsetse-transmitted trypanosomes – their biology, disease impact and control,” Journal of Invertebrate Pathology, vol. 112, Supplement 1, pp. S11–S14, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  81. R. Petrelli, F. Ranjbarian, S. Dall'Acqua et al., “An overlooked horticultural crop, Smyrnium olusatrum, as a potential source of compounds effective against African trypanosomiasis,” Parasitology International, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 146–151, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  82. S. Gehrig and T. Efferth, “Development of drug resistance in Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense and Trypanosoma brucei gambiense. Treatment of human African trypanosomiasis with natural products (review),” International Journal of Molecular Medicine, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 411–419, 2008. View at: Google Scholar
  83. F. Astelbauer and J. Walochnik, “Antiprotozoal compounds: state of the art and new developments,” International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 118–124, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  84. R. Brun, J. Blum, F. Chappuis, and C. Burri, “Human African trypanosomiasis,” Lancet, vol. 375, no. 9709, pp. 148–159, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  85. World Health Organization (WHO), Control and Surveillance of Human African Trypanosomiasis, vol. 984, World Health Organisation Technical Report Series, 2013.
  86. P. G. E. Kennedy, “The continuing problem of human African trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness),” Annals of Neurology, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 116–126, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  87. P. G. E. Kennedy, “Human African trypanosomiasis of the CNS: current issues and challenges,” The Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 113, no. 4, pp. 496–504, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  88. S. Costa, C. Cavadas, C. Cavaleiro, L. Salgueiro, and M. do Céu Sousa, “In vitro susceptibility of Trypanosoma brucei brucei to selected essential oils and their major components,” Experimental Parasitology, vol. 190, pp. 34–40, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  89. S. L. Croft, S. Sundar, and A. H. Fairlamb, “Drug resistance in leishmaniasis,” Clinical Microbiology Reviews, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 111–126, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  90. Ashutosh, S. Sundar, and N. Goyal, “Molecular mechanisms of antimony resistance in Leishmania,” Journal of Medical Microbiology, vol. 56, Part 2, no. 2, pp. 143–153, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  91. T. V. Piscopo and A. C. Mallia, “Leishmaniasis,” Postgraduate Medical Journal, vol. 82, no. 972, pp. 649–657, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  92. S. Hoet, F. Opperdoes, R. Brun, and J. Quetin-Leclercq, “Natural products active against African trypanosomes: a step towards new drugs,” Natural Product Reports, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 353–364, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  93. F. Herrmann, F. Sporer, A. Tahrani, and M. Wink, “Antitrypanosomal properties of Panax ginseng C. A. Meyer: new possibilities for a remarkable traditional drug,” Phytotherapy Research, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 86–98, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  94. E. Nibret and M. Wink, “Trypanocidal and antileukaemic effects of the essential oils of Hagenia abyssinica, Leonotis ocymifolia, Moringa stenopetala, and their main individual constituents,” Phytomedicine, vol. 17, no. 12, pp. 911–920, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  95. A. H. Fairlamb, “Chemotherapy of human African trypanosomiasis: current and future prospects,” Trends in Parasitology, vol. 19, no. 11, pp. 488–494, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  96. S. L. Croft, “The current status of antiparasite chemotherapy,” Parasitology, vol. 114, pp. S3–15, 1997. View at: Google Scholar
  97. G. Hide, J. C. Mottram, G. H. Coombs, and P. H. Holmes, Trypanosomiasis and Leishmaniasis: Biology and Control, CAB International, Wallingford-UK, 1997.
  98. A. J. Jones and V. M. Avery, “Future treatment options for human African trypanosomiasis,” Expert Review of Anti-Infective Therapy, vol. 13, no. 12, pp. 1429–1432, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  99. G. Benelli, “Gold nanoparticles – against parasites and insect vectors,” Acta Tropica, vol. 178, pp. 73–80, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  100. S. Hoet, F. Opperdoes, R. Brun, V. Adjakidjé, and J. Quetin-Leclercq, “In vitro antitrypanosomal activity of ethnopharmacologically selected Beninese plants,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 91, no. 1, pp. 37–42, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  101. J. Bero, V. Hannaert, G. Chataigné, M. F. Hérent, and J. Quetin-Leclercq, “In vitro antitrypanosomal and antileishmanial activity of plants used in Benin in traditional medicine and bio-guided fractionation of the most active extract,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 137, no. 2, pp. 998–1002, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  102. S. Geerts, P. H. Holmes, M. C. Eisler, and O. Diall, “African bovine trypanosomiasis: the problem of drug resistance,” Trends in Parasitology, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 25–28, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  103. S. Hoet, C. Stévigny, S. Block et al., “Alkaloids from Cassytha filiformis and related aporphines: antitrypanosomal activity, cytotoxicity, and interaction with DNA and topoisomerases,” Planta Medica, vol. 70, no. 5, pp. 407–413, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  104. D. J. Newman, G. M. Cragg, and K. M. Snader, “Natural products as sources of new drugs over the period 1981-2002,” Journal of Natural Products, vol. 66, no. 7, pp. 1022–1037, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  105. D. Legros, G. Ollivier, M. Gastellu-Etchegorry et al., “Treatment of human African trypanosomiasis – present situation and needs for research and development,” The Lancet Infectious Diseases, vol. 2, no. 7, pp. 437–440, 2002. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  106. R. Brun, R. Schumacher, C. Schmid, C. Kunz, and C. Burri, “The phenomenon of treatment failures in human African trypanosomiasis,” Tropical Medicine & International Health, vol. 6, no. 11, pp. 906–914, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  107. L. Scotti, F. J. B. Mendonça, M. S. da Silva, and M. T. Scotti, “Enzymatic targets in Trypanosoma brucei,” Current Protein & Peptide Science, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 243–259, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  108. A. Singh Grewal, D. Pandita, S. Bhardwaj, and V. Lather, “Recent updates on development of drug molecules for human African trypanosomiasis,” Current Topics in Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 16, no. 20, pp. 2245–2265, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  109. A. M. Clark, “Natural products as a resource for new drugs,” Pharmaceutical Research, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1133–1141, 1996. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  110. M. A. Ibrahim, A. Mohammed, M. B. Isah, and A. B. Aliyu, “Anti-trypanosomal activity of African medicinal plants: a review update,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 154, no. 1, pp. 26–54, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  111. O. Oyebode, N. B. Kandala, P. J. Chilton, and R. J. Lilford, “Use of traditional medicine in middle-income countries: a WHO-SAGE study,” Health Policy and Planning, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 984–991, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  112. A. Nour, S. Khalid, M. Kaiser, R. Brun, W.'. Abdallah, and T. Schmidt, “The antiprotozoal activity of sixteen asteraceae species native to Sudan and bioactivity-guided isolation of xanthanolides from Xanthium brasilicum,” Planta Medica, vol. 75, no. 12, pp. 1363–1368, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  113. M. R. Bockman, A. S. Kalinda, R. Petrelli et al., “Targeting Mycobacterium tuberculosis biotin protein ligase (MtBPL) with nucleoside-based bisubstrate adenylation inhibitors,” Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 58, no. 18, pp. 7349–7369, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  114. Y. Sun, J. No, G. Lee et al., “Phenolic constituents of medicinal plants with activity against Trypanosoma brucei,” Molecules, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 480–489, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  115. N. Habila, A. S. Agbaji, Z. Ladan et al., “Evaluation of in vitro activity of essential oils against Trypanosoma brucei brucei and Trypanosoma evansi,” Journal of Parasitology Research, vol. 2010, Article ID 534601, 5 pages, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  116. G. Benelli, “Plant-borne ovicides in the fight against mosquito vectors of medical and veterinary importance: a systematic review,” Parasitology Research, vol. 114, no. 9, pp. 3201–3212, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  117. J. S. Raut and S. M. Karuppayil, “A status review on the medicinal properties of essential oils,” Industrial Crops and Products, vol. 62, pp. 250–264, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  118. R. Pavela and G. Benelli, “Essential oils as ecofriendly biopesticides? Challenges and constraints,” Trends in Plant Science, vol. 21, no. 12, pp. 1000–1007, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  119. G. V. B. Cruz, P. V. S. Pereira, F. J. Patrício et al., “Increase of cellular recruitment, phagocytosis ability and nitric oxide production induced by hydroalcoholic extract from Chenopodium ambrosioides leaves,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 111, no. 1, pp. 148–154, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  120. L. Monzote, A. M. Montalvo, S. Almanonni, R. Scull, M. Miranda, and J. Abreu, “Activity of the essential oil from Chenopodium ambrosioides grown in Cuba against Leishmania amazonensis,” Chemotherapy, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 130–136, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  121. J. Muhd Haffiz, I. Norhayati, K. Getha et al., “Chemical composition and in vitro antitrypanosomal activity of fractions of essential oil from Cymbopogon nardus L.,” Tropical Biomedicine, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 9–14, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  122. S. Kpoviessi, J. Bero, P. Agbani et al., “Chemical composition, cytotoxicity and in vitro antitrypanosomal and antiplasmodial activity of the essential oils of four Cymbopogon species from Benin,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 151, no. 1, pp. 652–659, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  123. B. G. H. Kpadonou Kpoviessi, S. D. S. Kpoviessi, E. Yayi Ladekan et al., “In vitro antitrypanosomal and antiplasmodial activities of crude extracts and essential oils of Ocimum gratissimum Linn from Benin and influence of vegetative stage,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 155, no. 3, pp. 1417–1423, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  124. J. Bero, C. Beaufay, V. Hannaert, M.-F. Hérent, P. A. Michels, and J. Quetin-Leclercq, “Antitrypanosomal compounds from the essential oil and extracts of Keetia leucantha leaves with inhibitor activity on Trypanosoma brucei glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase,” Phytomedicine, vol. 20, no. 3–4, pp. 270–274, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  125. D. P. de Sousa, T. Lima, and D. Steverding, “Evaluation of antiparasitic activity of Mentha crispa essential oil, its major constituent rotundifolone and analogues against Trypanosoma brucei,” Planta Medica, vol. 82, no. 15, pp. 1346–1350, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  126. Y. Gutiérrez, R. Montes, R. Scull et al., “Chemodiversity associated with cytotoxicity and antimicrobial activity of Piper aduncum var. ossanum,” Chemistry & Biodiversity, vol. 13, no. 12, pp. 1715–1719, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  127. V. S. Parmar, S. C. Jain, K. S. Bisht et al., “Phytochemistry of the genus Piper,” Phytochemistry, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 597–673, 1997. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  128. H. D. Neuwinger, African Traditional Medicine: a Dictionary of Plant Use and Applications, Medpharm, Stuttgart, 2000.
  129. S. Hoet, C. Stévigny, M.-F. Hérent, and J. Quetin-Leclercq, “Antitrypanosomal compounds from the leaf essential oil of Strychnos spinosa,” Planta Medica, vol. 72, no. 5, pp. 480–482, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  130. S. Mulyaningsih, M. Youns, M. Z. El-Readi et al., “Biological activity of the essential oil of Kadsura longipedunculata (Schisandraceae) and its major components,” Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, vol. 62, no. 8, pp. 1037–1044, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  131. D. Hamdan, M. Z. El-Readi, E. Nibret et al., “Chemical composition of the essential oils of two Citrus species and their biological activities,” Pharmazie, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 141–147, 2010. View at: Google Scholar
  132. R. Petrelli, G. Orsomando, L. Sorci et al., “Biological activities of the essential oil from Erigeron floribundus,” Molecules, vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 1065–1078, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  133. Z. Cheikh-Ali, M. Adiko, S. Bouttier et al., “Composition, and antimicrobial and remarkable antiprotozoal activities of the essential oil of rhizomes of Aframomum sceptrum K. Schum (Zingiberaceae),” Chemistry & Biodiversity, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 658–667, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  134. F. Herrmann, R. Hamoud, F. Sporer, A. Tahrani, and M. Wink, “Carlina oxide – a natural polyacetylene from Carlina acaulis (Asteraceae) with potent antitrypanosomal and antimicrobial properties,” Planta Medica, vol. 77, no. 17, pp. 1905–1911, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  135. S. L. Ngahang Kamte, F. Ranjbarian, K. Cianfaglione et al., “Identification of highly effective antitrypanosomal compounds in essential oils from the Apiaceae family,” Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, vol. 156, pp. 154–165, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  136. F. Maggi, L. Barboni, F. Papa et al., “A forgotten vegetable (Smyrnium olusatrum L., Apiaceae) as a rich source of isofuranodiene,” Food Chemistry, vol. 135, no. 4, pp. 2852–2862, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  137. F. Maggi, F. Papa, C. Giuliani et al., “Essential oil chemotypification and secretory structures of the neglected vegetable Smyrnium olusatrum L. (Apiaceae) growing in central Italy,” Flavour and Fragance Journal, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 139–159, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  138. F. Maggi, F. Papa, S. Pucciarelli et al., “Stabilization of the cyclodecadiene derivative isofuranodiene by silver (I) coordination. Mechanistic and biological aspects,” Fitoterapia, vol. 117, pp. 52–60, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  139. K. A. d. F. Rodrigues, C. N. d. S. Dias, P. L. d. N. Néris et al., “2-Amino-thiophene derivatives present antileishmanial activity mediated by apoptosis and immunomodulation in vitro,” European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 106, pp. 1–14, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  140. M. B. Félix, E. R. de Souza, M. D. C. A. de Lima et al., “Antileishmanial activity of new thiophene-indole hybrids: design, synthesis biological and cytotoxic evaluation, and chemometric studies,” Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 24, no. 18, pp. 3972–3977, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  141. D. J. Brondani and L. S. da Silva Junior, “A química medicinal das Leishmanioses,” in Doenças Negligenciadas sob a ótica da Quimica Medicinal, pp. 203–260, CRV, Curitiba/Parana-Brazil, 1st edition edition, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  142. K. Katsuno, J. N. Burrows, K. Duncan et al., “Hit and lead criteria in drug discovery for infectious diseases of the developing world,” Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 751–758, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  143. S. B. H. Ahmed, R. M. Sghaier, F. Guesmi et al., “Evaluation of antileishmanial, cytotoxic and antioxidant activities of essential oils extracted from plants issued from the leishmaniasis-endemic region of Sned (Tunisia),” Natural Product Research, vol. 25, no. 12, pp. 1195–1201, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  144. M. A. Andrade, C. S. Azevedo, F. N. Motta et al., “Essential oils: in vitro activity against Leishmania amazonensis, cytotoxicity and chemical composition,” BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 444–448, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  145. R. R. P. Machado, W. Valente Júnior, B. Lesche et al., “Essential oil from leaves of Lantana camara: a potential source of medicine against leishmaniasis,” Revista Brasileira de Farmacognosia, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 1011–1017, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  146. A. Gawde, C. L. Cantrell, V. D. Zheljazkov, T. Astatkie, and V. Schlegel, “Steam distillation extraction kinetics regression models to predict essential oil yield, composition, and bioactivity of chamomile oil,” Industrial Crops and Products, vol. 58, pp. 61–67, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  147. J. M. Rodilla, L. A. Silva, N. Martinez et al., “Advances in the identification and agrochemical importance of sesquiterpenoids from Bulnesia sarmientoi essential oil,” Industrial Crops and Products, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 497–503, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  148. L. Kuźma, D. Kalemba, M. Różalski et al., “Chemical composition and biological activities of essential oil from Salvia sclarea plants regenerated in vitro,” Molecules, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1438–1447, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  149. L. P. Kvist, S. B. Christensen, H. B. Rasmussen, K. Mejia, and A. Gonzalez, “Identification and evaluation of Peruvian plants used to treat malaria and leishmaniasis,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 106, no. 3, pp. 390–402, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  150. R. d. C. R. Moreira, J. M. M. Rebêlo, M. E. A. Gama, and J. M. L. Costa, “Awareness of American tegumentary leishmaniasis (ATL) and use of alternative therapies in an endemic area in the Amazon Region in the State of Maranhão, Brazil,” Cadernos de Saúde Pública, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 187–195, 2002. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  151. M. Fleury, “À propos de I'intérêt médicinal du baume de Copahu,” Acta Botanica Gallica, vol. 144, no. 4, pp. 473–479, 1997. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  152. P. Grenand, C. Moretti, and H. Jacquemin, Pharmacopées Traditionnelles en Guyane, Éditions de lÓRSTOM, 2014.
  153. A. O. Santos, T. Ueda-Nakamura, B. P. Dias Filho, V. F. Veiga Junior, A. C. Pinto, and C. V. Nakamura, “Effect of Brazilian copaiba oils on Leishmania amazonensis,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 120, no. 2, pp. 204–208, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  154. N. M. Gomes, C. M. Rezende, S. P. Fontes, M. E. Matheus, and P. D. Fernandes, “Antinociceptive activity of Amazonian copaiba oils,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 109, no. 3, pp. 486–492, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  155. V. F. Veiga Junior, E. C. Rosas, M. V. Carvalho, M. G. M. O. Henriques, and A. C. Pinto, “Chemical composition and anti-inflammatory activity of copaiba oils from Copaifera cearensis Huber ex Ducke, Copaifera reticulata Ducke and Copaifera multijuga Hayne—a comparative study,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 112, no. 2, pp. 248–254, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  156. A. O. dos Santos, M. A. Costa, T. Ueda-Nakamura et al., “Leishmania amazonensis: effects of oral treatment with copaiba oil in mice,” Experimental Parasitology, vol. 129, no. 2, pp. 145–151, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  157. D. C. Soares, N. A. Portella, M. F. S. Ramos, A. C. Siani, and E. M. Saraiva, “Trans-β-caryophyllene: an effective antileishmanial compound found in commercial copaiba oil (Copaifera spp.),” Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, vol. 2013, Article ID 761323, 13 pages, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  158. Y. Tariku, A. Hymete, A. Hailu, and J. Rohloff, “In vitro evaluation of antileishmanial activity and toxicity of essential oils of Artemisia absinthium and Echinops kebericho,” Chemistry & Biodiversity, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 614–623, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  159. Y. Tariku, A. Hymete, A. Hailu, and J. Rohloff, “Essential‐oil composition, antileishmanial, and toxicity study of Artemisia abyssinica and Satureja punctata ssp. punctata from Ethiopia,” Chemistry & Biodiversity, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 1009–1018, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  160. V. D. da Silva, F. Almeida-Souza, A. M. Teles et al., “Chemical composition of Ocimum canum Sims. essential oil and the antimicrobial, antiprotozoal and ultrastructural alterations it induces in Leishmania amazonensis promastigotes,” Industrial Crops and Products, vol. 119, pp. 201–208, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  161. A. O. Santos, A. C. Santin, M. U. Yamaguchi et al., “Antileishmanial activity of an essential oil from the leaves and flowers of Achillea millefolium,” Annals of Tropical Medicine & Parasitology, vol. 104, no. 6, pp. 475–483, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  162. M. D. S. S. Rosa, R. R. Mendonca-Filho, H. R. Bizzo et al., “Antileishmanial activity of a linalool-rich essential oil from Croton cajucara,” Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 1895–1901, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  163. M. Islamuddin, G. Chouhan, M. Tyagi, M. Z. Abdin, D. Sahal, and F. Afrin, “Leishmanicidal activities of Artemisia annua leaf essential oil against Visceral Leishmaniasis,” Frontiers in Microbiology, vol. 5, p. 626, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  164. I. A. Rodrigues, M. M. B. Azevedo, F. C. M. Chaves et al., “In vitro cytocidal effects of the essential oil from Croton cajucara (red sacaca) and its major constituent 7- hydroxycalamenene against Leishmania chagasi,” BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 249, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  165. T. Ueda-Nakamura, R. R. Mendonça-Filho, J. A. Morgado-Díaz et al., “Antileishmanial activity of eugenol-rich essential oil from Ocimum gratissimum,” Parasitology International, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 99–105, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  166. F. L. Dutra, M. M. Oliveira, R. S. Santos et al., “Effects of linalool and eugenol on the survival of Leishmania (L.) infantum chagasi within macrophages,” Acta Tropica, vol. 164, pp. 69–76, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  167. M. R. Santin, A. O. dos Santos, C. V. Nakamura, B. P. Dias Filho, I. C. P. Ferreira, and T. Ueda-Nakamura, “In vitro activity of the essential oil of Cymbopogon citratus and its major component (citral) on Leishmania amazonensis,” Parasitology Research, vol. 105, no. 6, pp. 1489–1496, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  168. K. A. d. F. Rodrigues, L. V. Amorim, J. M. G. d. Oliveira et al., “Eugenia uniflora L. essential oil as a potential anti-Leishmania agent: effects on Leishmania amazonensis and possible mechanisms of action,” Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, vol. 2013, Article ID 279726, 10 pages, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  169. K. A. d. F. Rodrigues, L. V. Amorim, C. N. Dias, D. F. C. Moraes, S. M. P. Carneiro, and F. A. d. A. Carvalho, “Syzygium cumini (L.) Skeels essential oil and its major constituent α-pinene exhibit anti-Leishmania activity through immunomodulation in vitro,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 160, pp. 32–40, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  170. L. S. S. Bosquiroli, D. P. Demarque, Y. S. Rizk et al., “In vitro anti-Leishmania infantum activity of essential oil from Piper angustifolium,” Revista Brasileira de Farmacognosia, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 124–128, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  171. A. Bouyahya, A. Et-Touys, J. Abrini et al., “Lavandula stoechas essential oil from Morocco as novel source of antileishmanial, antibacterial and antioxidant activities,” Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology, vol. 12, pp. 179–184, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  172. A. Bouyahya, A. Et-Touys, Y. Bakri et al., “Chemical composition of Mentha pulegium and Rosmarinus officinalis essential oils and their antileishmanial, antibacterial and antioxidant activities,” Microbial Pathogenesis, vol. 111, pp. 41–49, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  173. A. Bouyahya, N. Dakka, A. Talbaoui et al., “Correlation between phenological changes, chemical composition and biological activities of the essential oil from Moroccan endemic Oregano (Origanum compactum Benth),” Industrial Crops and Products, vol. 108, pp. 729–737, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  174. R. Essid, F. Z. Rahali, K. Msaada et al., “Antileishmanial and cytotoxic potential of essential oils from medicinal plants in Northern Tunisia,” Industrial Crops and Products, vol. 77, pp. 795–802, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  175. I. G. Demarchi, M. S. Terron, M. V. Thomazella et al., “Antileishmanial and immunomodulatory effects of the essential oil from Tetradenia riparia (Hochstetter) Codd,” Parasite Immunology, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 64–77, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  176. L. Monzote, A. M. Montalvo, R. Scull, M. Miranda, and J. Abreu, “Combined effect of the essential oil from Chenopodium ambrosioides and antileishmanial drugs on promastigotes of Leishmania amazonensis,” Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de São Paulo, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 257–260, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  177. L. Monzote, M. García, A. M. Montalvo, R. Scull, M. Miranda, and J. Abreu, “In vitro activity of an essential oil against Leishmania donovani,” Phytotherapy Research, vol. 21, no. 11, pp. 1055–1058, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  178. L. Monzote, A. M. Montalvo, R. Scull, M. Miranda, and J. Abreu, “Activity, toxicity and analysis of resistance of essential oil from Chenopodium ambrosioides after intraperitoneal, oral and intralesional administration in BALB/c mice infected with Leishmania amazonensis: a preliminary study,” Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, vol. 61, no. 2–3, pp. 148–153, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  179. L. Monzote, M. García, A. M. Montalvo, R. Linares, and R. Scull, “Effect of oral treatment with the essential oil from Chenopodium ambrosioides against cutaneous Leishmaniasis in BALB/c mice, caused by Leishmania amazonensis,” Forschende Komplementärmedizin/Research in Complementary Medicine, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 334–338, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  180. L. Monzote, J. Pastor, R. Scull, and L. Gille, “Antileishmanial activity of essential oil from Chenopodium ambrosioides and its main components against experimental cutaneous leishmaniasis in BALB/c mice,” Phytomedicine, vol. 21, no. 8–9, pp. 1048–1052, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  181. L. Monzote, M. García, R. Scull, A. Cuellar, and W. N. Setzer, “Antileishmanial activity of the essential oil from Bixa orellana,” Phytotherapy Research, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 753–758, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  182. L. Monzote, G. Geroldinger, M. Tonner et al., “Interaction of ascaridole, carvacrol, and caryophyllene oxide from essential oil of Chenopodium ambrosioides L. with mitochondria in Leishmania and other eukaryotes,” Phytotherapy Research, vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 1729–1740, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  183. A. V. Colares, F. Almeida-Souza, N. N. Taniwaki et al., “In vitro antileishmanial activity of essential oil of Vanillosmopsis arborea (Asteraceae) Baker,” Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, vol. 2013, Article ID 727042, 7 pages, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  184. R. Tisserand and T. Balacs, Essential Oil Safety: A Guide for Health Care Professionals, Churchill Livingstine, 1st edition, 1995.
  185. M. Morales-Yuste, F. Morillas-Márquez, J. Martín-Sánchez, A. Valero-López, and M. C. Navarro-Moll, “Activity of (−)α-bisabolol against Leishmania infantum promastigotes,” Phytomedicine, vol. 17, no. 3–4, pp. 279–281, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  186. F. Xavier, K. Rodrigues, R. de Oliveira et al., “Synthesis and in vitro anti Leishmania amazonensis biological screening of Morita-Baylis-Hillman adducts prepared from eugenol, thymol and carvacrol,” Molecules, vol. 21, no. 11, article 1483, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  187. A. Silva, R. Scher, F. Santos et al., “Leishmanicidal activity and structure-activity relationships of essential oil constituents,” Molecules, vol. 22, no. 5, p. 815, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  188. S. M. de Morais, N. S. Vila-Nova, C. M. L. Bevilaqua et al., “Thymol and eugenol derivatives as potential antileishmanial agents,” Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 22, no. 21, pp. 6250–6255, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  189. P. A. Farias-Junior, M. C. Rios, T. A. Moura et al., “Leishmanicidal activity of carvacrol-rich essential oil from Lippia sidoides cham,” Biological Research, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 399–402, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  190. E. Houël, G. Gonzalez, J. M. Bessière et al., “Therapeutic switching: from antidermatophytic essential oils to new leishmanicidal products,” Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 106–113, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  191. B. M. Cardoso, T. F. P. Mello, S. N. Lopes et al., “Antileishmanial activity of the essential oil from Tetradenia riparia obtained in different seasons,” Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, vol. 110, no. 8, pp. 1024–1034, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  192. I. G. Demarchi, M. V. Thomazella, M. de Souza Terron et al., “Antileishmanial activity of essential oil and 6,7-dehydroroyleanone isolated from Tetradenia riparia,” Experimental Parasitology, vol. 157, pp. 128–137, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  193. R. Yesmit Karina Ríos, J. Astrid Carolina Otero, H. Diana Lorena Muñoz, R. Mónica Echeverry, R. Sara María Robledo, and C. Maira Alejandra Yepes, “Actividad citotóxica y leishmanicida in vitro del aceite esencial de manzanilla (Matricaria chamomilla),” Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Químico-Farmacéuticas, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 200–211, 2008. View at: Google Scholar
  194. N. Q. M. Al-Hajj, H. Wang, M. A. A. Gasmalla et al., “Chemical composition and antioxidant activity of the essential oil of Pulicaria Inuloides,” Journal of Food and Nutrition Research, vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 221–227, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  195. H. Mahmoudvand, F. Ezzatkhah, F. Sharififar, I. Sharifi, and E. S. Dezaki, “Antileishmanial and cytotoxic effects of essential oil and methanolic extract of Myrtus communis L,” The Korean Journal of Parasitology, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 21–27, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  196. L. F. Neira, E. Stashenko, and P. Escobar, “Actividad antiparasitaria de extractos de plantas colombianas de la familia Euphorbiaceae,” Revista de la Universidad Industrial de Santander. Salud, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 15–22, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  197. E. V. Costa, M. L. B. Pinheiro, J. R. d. A. Silva et al., “Antimicrobial and antileishmanial activity of essential oil from the leaves of Annona foetida (Annonaceae),” Química Nova, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 78–81, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  198. R. López, L. E. Cuca, and G. Delgado, “Antileishmanial and immunomodulatory activity of Xylopia discreta,” Parasite Immunology, vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 623–630, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  199. E. B. B. Estevam, I. P. B. D. Deus, V. P. D. Silva et al., “In vitro antiparasitic activity and chemical composition of the essential oil from Protium ovatum leaves (Burceraceae),” Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, vol. 89, no. 4, pp. 3005–3013, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  200. J. O. de Melo, T. A. Bitencourt, A. L. Fachin et al., “Antidermatophytic and antileishmanial activities of essential oils from Lippia gracilis Schauer genotypes,” Acta Tropica, vol. 128, no. 1, pp. 110–115, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  201. A. Uniyal, S. N. Tikar, R. Singh et al., “Synergic effect of effective oils against Aedes aegypti female mosquito, vector od dengue and chikungunya,” International Journal of Mosquito Research, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 29–35, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  202. M. Soonwera, “Efficacy of essential oils from Citrus plants against mosquito vector Aedes aegypti (Linn) and Culex quinquefasciatus (Say),” Journal of Agricultural Technology, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 669–681, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  203. F. Manzoor, K. B. Samreen, and Z. Parveen, “Larvicidal activity of essential oils against Aedes aegypti and Culex quinquefasciatus larvae (Diptera Culicidae),” The Journal of Animal & Plant Sciences, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 420–424, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  204. C. N. Dias and D. F. C. Moraes, “Essential oils and their compounds as Aedes aegypti L. (Diptera Culicidae) larvicides: review,” Parasitology Research, vol. 113, no. 2, pp. 565–592, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  205. H. S. Santos, P. N. Bandeira, T. L. G. Lemos, and G. M. P. Santiago, “Chemical composition and larvicidal activity against Aedes aegypti L.(Diptera: Culicidae) of essential oils from leaves, stalks and roots of the Croton nepetaefolius Baill (Euphorbiaceae),” International Journal of Mosquito Research, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 19–22, 2017. View at: Google Scholar
  206. D. Navarro, P. Silva, M. Silva, T. Napoleao, and P. Paiva, “Larvicidal activity of plant and algae extracts, essential oils and isolated chemical constituents against Aedes aegypti,” The Natural Products Journal, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 268–291, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  207. G. L. Oliveira, S. K. Cardoso, C. R. Lara Junior et al., “Chemical study and larvicidal activity against Aedes Aegypti of essential oil of Piper aduncum L. (Piperaceae),” Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, vol. 85, no. 4, pp. 1227–1234, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  208. F. Manzoor, K. B. Samreen, and Z. Parveen, “Larvicidal activity of essetial oils against Aedes aegypti and Culex quinquefasciatus larvae (Diptera: Culicidae),” The Journal of Animal & Plant Sciences, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 420–424, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  209. M. Soonwera, “Efficacy of essential oils from Citrus plants against mosquito vectors Aedes aegypti (Linn.) and Culex quinquefasciatus (Say),” International Journal of Agricultural Technology, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 669–681, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  210. A. F. d. O. Araujo, J. T. Ribeiro-Paes, J. T. d. Deus et al., “Larvicidal activity of Syzygium aromaticum (L.) Merr and Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck essential oils and their antagonistic effects with temephos in resistant populations of Aedes aegypti,” Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, vol. 111, no. 7, pp. 443–449, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  211. D. Sritabutra, M. Soonwera, S. Waltanachanobon, and S. Poungjai, “Evaluation of herbal essential oil as repellents against Aedes aegypti (L.) and Anopheles dirus Peyton & Harrion,” Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Biomedicine, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. S124–S128, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  212. S. Zhu, X. C. Liu, Z. L. Liu, and X. Xu, “Chemical composition of Salvia plebeian R. Br. essential oil and its larvicidal activity against Aedes aegypti L.,” Tropical Journal of Pharmaceutical Research, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 831–836, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  213. S.-S. Cheng, M.-T. Chua, K.-H. Tsai, W.-J. Chen, and S.-T. Chang, “Chemical composition and mosquito larvicidal activity of essential oils from leaf of Cryptomeria japonica,” 2013, http://gra103.aca.ntu.edu.tw/gdoc/94/d89625006a.pdf?origin=publication_detail. View at: Google Scholar
  214. S. R. L. Santos, M. A. Melo, A. V. Cardoso, R. L. C. Santos, D. P. de Sousa, and S. C. H. Cavalcanti, “Structure-activity relationships of larvicidal monoterpenes and derivatives against Aedes aegypti Linn,” Chemosphere, vol. 84, no. 1, pp. 150–153, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  215. S. S. Cheng, M. T. Chua, E. H. Chang, C. G. Huang, W. J. Chen, and S. T. Chang, “Variations in insecticidal activity and chemical compositions of leaf essential oils from Cryptomeria japonica at different ages,” Bioresource Technology, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 465–470, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  216. S. S. Cheng, C. G. Huang, Y. J. Chen, J. J. Yu, W. J. Chen, and S. T. Chang, “Chemical compositions and larvicidal activities of leaf essential oils from two eucalyptus species,” Bioresource Technology, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 452–456, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  217. S. R. L. Santos, V. B. Silva, M. A. Melo et al., “Toxic effects on and structure-toxicity relationships of phenylpropanoids, terpenes, and related compounds in Aedes aegypti larvae,” Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases, vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 1049–1054, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  218. N. Tabanca, C. Avonto, M. Wang et al., “Comparative investigation of Umbellularia californica and Laurus nobilis leaf essential oils and identification of constituents active against Aedes aegypti,” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, vol. 61, no. 50, pp. 12283–12291, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  219. D. K. Rocha, O. Matosc, M. T. Novoa, A. C. Figueiredo, M. Delgado, and C. Moiteiro, “Larvicidal activity against Aedes aegypti of Foeniculum vulgare essential oils from Portugal and Cape Verde,” Natural Product Communications, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 677–682, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  220. T. C. Lima, T. K. M. da Silva, F. L. Silva et al., “Larvicidal activity of Mentha x villosa Hudson essential oil, rotundifolone and derivatives,” Chemosphere, vol. 104, pp. 37–43, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  221. N. Tabanca, Z. Gao, B. Demirci et al., “Molecular and phytochemical investigation of Angelica dahurica and Angelica pubescentis essential oils and their biological activity against Aedes aegypti, stephanitis pyrioides, and colletotrichum species,” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, vol. 62, no. 35, pp. 8848–8857, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  222. G. Santos, K. Dutra, C. Lira et al., “Effects of Croton rhamnifolioides essential oil on Aedes aegypti oviposition, larval toxicity and trypsin activity,” Molecules, vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 16573–16587, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  223. N. Tabanca, U. R. Bernier, A. Ali et al., “Bioassay-guided investigation of two Monarda essential oils as repellents of yellow fever mosquito Aedes aegypti,” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, vol. 61, no. 36, pp. 8573–8580, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  224. J. D. Barbosa, V. B. Silva, P. B. Alves et al., “Structure-activity relationships of eugenol derivatives against Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) larvae,” Pest Management Science, vol. 68, no. 11, pp. 1478–1483, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  225. I. M. Chung, H. K. Song, M. A. Yeo, and H. I. Moon, “Composition and immunotoxicity activity of major essential oils from stems of Allium victorialis L. var. Platyphyllum makino against Aedes aegypti L,” Immunopharmacology and Immunotoxicology, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 480–483, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  226. H. I. Moon, “Larvicidal activity of major essential oils from stems of Allium monanthum Maxim. against Aedes aegypti L,” Journal of Enzyme Inhibition and Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 827–830, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  227. V. B. Silva, D. L. Travassos, A. Nepel et al., “Synthesis and chemometrics of thymol and carvacrol derivatives as larvicides against Aedes aegypti,” Journal of Arthropod-Borne Diseases, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 305–320, 2017. View at: Google Scholar
  228. L. Scotti, M. Scotti, V. Silva, S. Santos, S. Cavalcanti, and F. Junior, “Chemometric studies on potential larvicidal compounds against Aedes aegypti,” Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 201–210, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2019 Emanuela Coutinho Luna et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


More related articles

2309 Views | 706 Downloads | 5 Citations
 PDF  Download Citation  Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

We are committed to sharing findings related to COVID-19 as quickly and safely as possible. Any author submitting a COVID-19 paper should notify us at help@hindawi.com to ensure their research is fast-tracked and made available on a preprint server as soon as possible. We will be providing unlimited waivers of publication charges for accepted articles related to COVID-19. Sign up here as a reviewer to help fast-track new submissions.