METHODS: Twenty-eight male Wistar rats were randomly assigned to four groups of seven rats. The two control groups were administered vitamin-free palm oil (vehicle) and the two treatment groups were given omeprazole (20 mg/kg) or tocotrienol (60 mg/kg) by oral gavage. After 28 d of treatment, rats from one control group and both treated groups were subjected to WIRS one time for 3.5 h. Gastric lesions were measured and gastric tissues were obtained to measure vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), epidermal growth factor (EGF), basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), and transforming growth factor-alpha (TGF-α) mRNA expression.
RESULTS: Rats exposed to WIRS for 3.5 h demonstrated the presence of considerable ulcers in the form of gastric erosion. The lesion index in the stressed control (S) group was increased (P < 0.001) compared to the tocotrienol treated and omeprazole treated groups. Stress led to a decrease in gastric VEGF (P < 0.001), bFGF (P < 0.001) and TGF-α (P < 0.001) mRNA levels and caused an increase in EGF mRNA (P < 0.001) that was statistically significant compared to the non-stressed control group. Although both treatment agents exerted similar ulcer reducing ability, only treatment with tocotrienol led to increased expression of VEGF (P = 0.008), bFGF (P = 0.001) and TGF-α (P = 0.002) mRNA.
CONCLUSION: Tocotrienol provides gastroprotective effects in WIRS-induced ulcers. Compared to omeprazole, tocotrienol exerts a similar protective effect, albeit through multiple mechanisms of protection, particularly through up-regulation of growth factors that assist in repair of gastric tissue injuries.
METHODS: Colon tissues (normal and cancerous) were homogenized and the proteins were extracted using three protein extraction buffers. The extraction buffers were used in an orderly sequence of increasing extraction strength for proteins with hydrophobic properties. The protein extracts were separated using the SDS-PAGE method and the images were captured and analyzed using Quantity One software. The target protein bands were subjected to in-gel digestion with trypsin and finally analyzed using an ESI-ion trap mass spectrometer.
RESULTS: A total of 50 differentially expressed proteins in colonic cancerous and normal tissues were identified.
CONCLUSION: Many of the identified proteins have been reported to be involved in the progression of similar or other types of cancers. However, some of the identified proteins have not been reported before. In addition, a number of hypothetical proteins were also identified.
METHODS: 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl-tertazolium-bromide assay was performed to determine the antiproliferative effect of p-Coumaric acid against colon cancer cells. Colony forming assay was conducted to quantify the colony inhibition in HCT 15 and HT 29 colon cancer cells after p-Coumaric acid treatment. Propidium Iodide staining of the HCT 15 cells using flow cytometry was done to study the changes in the cell cycle of treated cells. Identification of apoptosis was done using scanning electron microscope and photomicrograph evaluation of HCT 15 cells after exposing to p-Coumaric acid. Levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS) of HCT 15 cells exposed to p-Coumaric acid was evaluated using 2', 7'-dichlorfluorescein-diacetate. Mitochondrial membrane potential of HCT-15 was assessed using rhodamine-123 with the help of flow cytometry. Lipid layer breaks associated with p-Coumaric acid treatment was quantified using the dye merocyanine 540. Apoptosis was confirmed and quantified using flow cytometric analysis of HCT 15 cells subjected to p-Coumaric acid treatment after staining with YO-PRO-1.
RESULTS: Antiproliferative test showed p-Coumaric acid has an inhibitory effect on HCT 15 and HT 29 cells with an IC₅₀ (concentration for 50% inhibition) value of 1400 and 1600 μmol/L respectively. Colony forming assay revealed the time-dependent inhibition of HCT 15 and HT 29 cells subjected to p-Coumaric acid treatment. Propidium iodide staining of treated HCT 15 cells showed increasing accumulation of apoptotic cells (37.45 ± 1.98 vs 1.07 ± 1.01) at sub-G1 phase of the cell cycle after p-Coumaric acid treatment. HCT-15 cells observed with photomicrograph and scanning electron microscope showed the signs of apoptosis like blebbing and shrinkage after p-Coumaric acid exposure. Evaluation of the lipid layer showed increasing lipid layer breaks was associated with the growth inhibition of p-Coumaric acid. A fall in mitochondrial membrane potential and increasing ROS generation was observed in the p-Coumaric acid treated cells. Further apoptosis evaluated by YO-PRO-1 staining also showed the time-dependent increase of apoptotic cells after treatment.
CONCLUSION: These results depicted that p-Coumaric acid inhibited the growth of colon cancer cells by inducing apoptosis through ROS-mitochondrial pathway.
AIM: To evaluate the anti-tumour activity and toxicological effects of Orthosiphon stamineus extract formulation (ID: C5EOSEW5050ESA trademarked as Nuva-staticTM), and gemcitabine combination on pancreatic xenograft model.
METHODS: Mice were randomly divided into six groups of 6 mice each (n = 6) and given different treatments for 28 d. The study design consisted of a 2 x 3 factorial treatment structure, with gemcitabine (yes/no) by oral (at 1200 and 400 mg/kg per day). Human pancreatic cancer cells were injected subcutaneously into the flanks of athymic nude mice. C5EOSEW5050ESA (200 or 400 mg/kg per day) was administered orally, while gemcitabine (10 mg/kg per 3 d) was given intraperitoneally either alone or in combination treatment. Histopathological analyses of vital organs, tumour tissues, and incidence of lethality were analysed. Analyses of tumour necrosis and proliferation were determined by haematoxylin-eosin staining and immunohistochemistry for Ki-67, respectively.
RESULTS: No signs of toxicity or damage to vital organs were observed in all treatment groups compared to the untreated group. C5EOSEW5050ESA at 200 mg/kg and gemcitabine combination had no additive antitumor effects compared to a single treatment. Remarkably, a comparably greater response in a reduction in tumour growth, Ki-67 protein expression, and necrosis was demonstrated by 400 mg/kg of C5EOSEW5050ESA and gemcitabine combination than that of the individual agents.
CONCLUSION: These results highlighted the synergistic activity of C5EOSEW5050ESA with gemcitabine to reduce pancreatic tumour growth in mice compared to a single treatment. Thus, this study provides valuable insights into using C5EOSEW5050ESA as a complementary treatment with gemcitabine for pancreatic cancer.