MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study aimed to assess the effects of commercial and recombinant bromelain on the cytokinetic behavior of MCF-7 breast cancer cells and their potential as therapeutic alternatives in cancer treatment. Cytotoxic activities of commercial and recombinant bromelain were determined using (sulforhodamine) SRB assay. Next, cell viability assays were conducted to determine effects of commercial and recombinant bromelain on MCF-7 cell cytokinetic behavior. Finally, the established growth kinetic data were used to modify a model that predicts the effects of commercial and recombinant bromelain on MCF-7 cells.
RESULTS: Commercial and recombinant bromelain exerted strong effects towards decreasing the cell viability of MCF-7 cells with IC50 values of 5.13 μg/mL and 6.25 μg/mL, respectively, compared to taxol with an IC50 value of 0.063 μg/mL. The present results indicate that commercial and recombinant bromelain both have anti-proliferative activity, reduced the number of cell generations from 3.92 to 2.81 for commercial bromelain and to 2.86 for recombinant bromelain, while with taxol reduction was to 3.12. Microscopic observation of bromelain-treated MCF-7 cells demonstrated detachment. Inhibition activity was verified with growth rates decreased dynamically from 0.009 h-1 to 0.0059 h-1 for commercial bromelain and to 0.0063 h-1 for recombinant bromelain.
CONCLUSIONS: Commercial and recombinant bromelain both affect cytokinetics of MCF-7 cells by decreasing cell viability, demonstrating similar strength to taxol.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Selective agonists of PKA and EPAC synergistically inhibited Egr1 expression, which was essential for VSMC proliferation. Forskolin, adenosine, A2B receptor agonist BAY60-6583 and Cicaprost also inhibited Egr1 expression in VSMC but not in endothelial cells. Inhibition of Egr1 by cAMP was independent of cAMP response element binding protein (CREB) activity but dependent on inhibition of serum response element (SRE) activity. SRF binding to the Egr1 promoter was not modulated by cAMP stimulation. However, Egr1 expression was dependent on the SRF co-factors Elk1 and 4 but independent of MAL. Inhibition of SRE-dependent Egr1 expression was due to synergistic inhibition of Rac1 activity by PKA and EPAC, resulting in rapid cytoskeleton remodelling and nuclear export of ERK1/2. This was associated with de-phosphorylation of the SRF co-factor Elk1.
CONCLUSION: cAMP inhibits VSMC proliferation by rapidly inhibiting Egr1 expression. This occurs, at least in part, via inhibition of Rac1 activity leading to rapid actin-cytoskeleton remodelling, nuclear export of ERK1/2, impaired Elk1-phosphorylation and inhibition of SRE activity. This identifies one of the earliest mechanisms underlying the anti-mitogenic effects of cAMP in VSMC but not in endothelial cells, making it an attractive target for selective inhibition of VSMC proliferation.