Cruciferous vegetable consumption correlates with reduced risk of cancer. This chemopreventative activity may involve glucosinolates and their hydrolysis products. Glucosinolate-derived isothiocyanates have been studied for their toxicity and chemopreventative properties, but other hydrolysis products (epithionitriles and nitriles) have not been thoroughly examined. We report that these hydrolysis products differ in their cytotoxicity to human cells, with toxicity most strongly associated with isothiocyanates rather than epithionitriles and nitriles. We explored mechanisms of this differential cytotoxicity by examining the role of oxidative metabolism, oxidative stress, mitochondrial permeability, reduced glutathione levels, cell cycle arrest and apoptosis. 2-Propenylisothiocyanate and 3-butenylisothiocyanate both inhibited cytochome P450 1A (CYP1A) enzyme activity in CYP expressing MCL-5 cells at high cytotoxic doses. Incubation of MCL-5 cells with non-cytotoxic doses of 2-propenylisothiocyanate for 24h resulted in a dose-dependent inhibition of ethoxyresorufin O-deethylase, yet failed to affect CYP1A1 mRNA expression indicating interference with enzyme activity rather than inhibition of transcription. Increased reactive oxygen species (ROS) production was observed only for 2-propenylisothiocyanate treatment. 2-Propenylisothiocyanate treatment lowered reduced glutathione levels whereas no changes were noted with 3,4-epithiobutylnitrile. Cell cycle analysis showed that 2-propenylisothiocyanate induced a G2/M block whereas other hydrolysis products showed only marginal effects. We found that 2-propenylisothiocyanate and 3-butenylisothiocyanate induced cell death predominantly via necrosis whereas, 3,4-epithiobutylnitrile promoted both necrosis and apoptosis. Thus the activity of glucosinolate hydrolysis products includes cytotoxicity that is compound-class specific and may contribute to their putative chemoprotection properties.
Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. The growth of breast cancer cells is either hormone-dependent or hormone-independent. Both types are represented in vitro by the estrogen-receptor positive (ER+) MCF-7 and the estrogen-receptor negative (ER-) MDA-MB-231 cell lines, respectively. The pS2 gene is an estrogen-regulated gene and serves as a marker for the ER+ tumours. Carotenoids are pigments with anti-cancer properties besides having pro-vitamin A, antioxidant and free-radical quenching effects. This study was designed firstly, to compare the effect of palm oil carotene concentrate with retinoic acid on the growth of the ER+ MCF-7 and the ER- MDA-MB-231 cells; and secondly to evaluate the effect of the palm oil carotene concentrate on the regulation of pS2 mRNA. The growth experiments were performed with monolayer cells seeded in phenol red free RPMI 1640 culture media and subsequently treated with varying concentrations of either retinoic acid or palm oil carotenoids. The cell numbers were determined at the start of each experiment and then at successive time intervals. The results showed that the palm oil carotene concentrate caused dose-dependent inhibition of estradiol-stimulated growth of MCF-7 cells but did not affect the proliferation of MDA-MB-231 cells. Retinoic acid caused similar, albeit more potent effects, as significant inhibition was observed at lower concentrations than the palm oil carotenoids. In the pS2 gene expression experiment, cell monolayers were treated with the carotene concentrate (10(-6) M), either with or without supplemented estradiol (10(-8) M), and subsequently the RNA was extracted. Northern blotting was performed and the regulation of pS2 mRNA determined using a 32P-labelled pS2 cDNA probe. The results showed that the palm oil carotene concentrate did not affect the expression of pS2 mRNA and are therefore independent of the estrogen-regulated pathway.
Cisplatin (Cis) is an effective chemotherapeutic intervention against many cancer types. However, the oxidative stress-related toxicities associated with cancer cell resistance-induced dose scaling has limited its long-term use. In the present study, we explored the benefits of the antioxidant, tert-butylhydroquinone (tBHQ; 50 mg/kg b.w./day, for 14 days) against Cis single dose injection (7 mg/kg b.w., i.p on Day 8), on testicular toxicity of male Wistar rats. Cis triggered testicular and epididymal oxidative stress, testicular inflammation (upregulated NF-κB, TNF-α and IL-1β mRNA levels, and downregulated IL-10 mRNA level), increased testicular apoptosis (increased Bax/Bcl2 and caspase-3 mRNA levels) and decreased testicular germ cells proliferation. Further, Cis decreased testicular steroidogenesis (decreased expression of StAR, CYP11A1, 3β-HSD and 17β-HSD mRNA and proteins) and decreased follicle stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone and testosterone levels. Cis also decreased sperm count, motility, viability, normal morphology and Johnsen score. However, intervention with tBHQ significantly decreased oxidative stress by upregulating Nrf2 gene, suppressed inflammation, apoptosis and increased testicular germ cells proliferation. tBHQ also increased steroidogenesis and improved sperm parameters. Taken together, tBHQ improves steroidogenesis and spermatogenesis in Cis-intoxicated rats by improving antioxidant status, dampening inflammation and apoptosis, thus improving the proliferative capacity of spermatogenic cells.
Toxicity testing relies heavily on animals, especially rodents as part of the non-clinical laboratory testing of substances. However, the use of mammalians and the number of animals employed in research has become a concern for institutional ethics committees. Toxicity testing involving rodents and other mammals is laborious and costly. Alternatively, non-rodent models are used as replacement, as they have less ethical considerations and are cost-effective. Of the many alternative models that can be used as replacement models, which ones can be used in predictive toxicology? What is the correlation between these models and rodents? Are there standardized protocols governing the toxicity testing of these commonly used predictive models? This review outlines the common alternative animal models for predictive toxicology to address the importance of these models, the challenges, and their standard testing protocols.
Aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR) is a ligand-dependent receptor that belongs to the superfamily of basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) transcription factors. The activation of the canonical AHR signaling pathway is known to induce the expression of cytochrome P450 enzymes, facilitating the detoxification metabolism in the human body. Additionally, AHR could interact with various signaling pathways such as epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3), hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α), nuclear factor ekappa B (NF-κβ), estrogen receptor (ER), and androgen receptor (AR) signaling pathways. Over the past 30 years, several studies have reported that various chemical, physical, or biological agents, such as tobacco, hydrocarbon compounds, industrial and agricultural chemical wastes, drugs, UV, viruses, and other toxins, could affect AHR expression or activity, promoting cancer development. Thus, it is valuable to overview how these factors regulate AHR-mediated carcinogenesis. Current findings have reported that many compounds could act as AHR ligands to drive the expressions of AHR-target genes, such as CYP1A1, CYP1B1, MMPs, and AXL, and other targets that exert a pro-proliferation or anti-apoptotic effect, like XIAP. Furthermore, some other physical and chemical agents, such as UV and 3-methylcholanthrene, could promote AHR signaling activities, increasing the signaling activities of a few oncogenic pathways, such as the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/protein kinase B (PI3K/AKT) and mitogen-activated protein kinase/extracellular signal-regulated kinase (MAPK/ERK) pathways. Understanding how various factors regulate AHR-mediated carcinogenesis processes helps clinicians and scientists plan personalized therapeutic strategies to improve anti-cancer treatment efficacy. As many studies that have reported the roles of AHR in regulating carcinogenesis are preclinical or observational clinical studies that did not explore the detailed mechanisms of how different chemical, physical, or biological agents promote AHR-mediated carcinogenesis processes, future studies should focus on conducting large-scale and functional studies to unravel the underlying mechanism of how AHR interacts with different factors in regulating carcinogenesis processes.