Methods: This study investigated the cytotoxic effect of the venom from Trimeresurus purpureomaculatus, the mangrove pit viper (also known as shore pit viper) which is native in Malaysia, across a panel of human cancer cell lines from breast, lung, colon and prostate as well as the corresponding normal cell lines of each tissue.
Results: The venom exhibited dose-dependent cytotoxic activities on all cell lines tested, with median inhibition concentrations (IC50) ranging from 0.42 to 6.98 µg/mL. The venom has a high selectivity index (SI = 14.54) on breast cancer cell line (MCF7), indicating that it is significantly more cytotoxic toward the cancer than to normal cell lines. Furthermore, the venom was fractionated using C18 reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography and the anticancer effect of each protein fraction was examined. Fraction 1 that contains a hydrophilic low molecular weight (approximately 7.5 kDa) protein was found to be the most cytotoxic and selective toward the breast cancer cell line (MCF7). The protein was identified using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry as a venom disintegrin, termed purpureomaculin in this study.
Conclusion: Taken together, the findings revealed the potent and selective cytotoxicity of a disintegrin protein isolated from the Malaysian T. purpureomaculatus venom and suggested its anticancer potential in drug discovery.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of anticoagulant therapies for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis in pregnancy. The anticoagulant drugs included are UFH, low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and warfarin.
SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (March 2010) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing any combination of warfarin, UFH, LMWH and placebo in pregnant women.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used methods described in the Cochrane Handbooks for Systemic Reviews of Interventions for assessing the eligibility of studies identified by the search strategy. A minimum of two review authors independently assessed each study.
MAIN RESULTS: We did not identify any eligible studies for inclusion in the review.We identified three potential studies; after assessing eligibility, we excluded all three as they did not meet the prespecified inclusion criteria. One study compared LMWH and UFH in pregnant women with previous thromboembolic events and, for most of these women, anticoagulants were used as thromboprophylaxis. There were only three women who had a thromboembolic event during the current pregnancy and it was unclear whether the anticoagulant was used as therapy or prophylaxis. We excluded one study because it included only women undergoing caesarean birth. The third study was not a randomised trial.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence from randomised controlled trials on the effectiveness of anticoagulation for deep vein thrombosis in pregnancy. Further studies are required.