| Literature DB >> 24174974 |
Victor Kuete1, Aimé G Fankam, Benjamin Wiench, Thomas Efferth.
Abstract
Introduction. The present study aims at evaluating the cytotoxicity of twelve parts from six Cameroonian medicinal plants on sensitive and drug-resistant cancer cell lines. We also studied the mode of action of the most active plants, Gladiolus quartinianus, Vepris soyauxii, and Anonidium mannii. Methods. The cytotoxicity of the extracts was determined using a resazurin assay. Flow cytometry was used for cell-cycle analysis and detection of apoptosis, analysis of mitochondrial membrane potential (MMP), and measurement of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Results. At 40 g/mL, three extracts showed a growth of CCRF-CEM leukemia cells by less than 50%. This includes the extracts from G. quartinianus (GQW; 25.69%), Vepris soyauxii leaves (VSL; 29.82%), and Anonidium mannii leaves (AML; 31.58%). The lowest IC50 values below 30 μ g/mL were obtained with GQW, AML and VSL against 7/9, 8/9, and 9/9 tested cancer cell lines, respectively. The lowest IC50 values for each plant were 4.09 μ g/mL, and 9.14 μ g/mL (against U87MG.ΔEGFR cells), respectively, for VSL and AML and 10.57 μ g/mL (against CCRF-CEM cells) for GQW. GQW induced cell cycle arrest between G0/G1 and S phases, whilst VSL and AML induced arrest in G0/G1. All three extracts induced apoptosis in CCRF-CEM cells by loss of MMP, whilst AML also enhanced production of ROS. Conclusion. The three active plants may be a source for the development of new anticancer drugs.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24174974 PMCID: PMC3794640 DOI: 10.1155/2013/285903
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Pharmacognosy of Cameroonian medicinal plants.
| Samples, family, and herbarium numbera | Traditional treatment | Part used in this study and extraction yield (%)b | Area of plant collection | Known bioactive (or potentially active) compounds | Screened activity for crude plant extract |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Dysentery, cold, toothache [ | Fruits (4.14%), leaves (10.16%), stem (8.42%) and roots bark (8.69%) | Lebialem, South West region of Cameroon | Allan Xanthones A and D; 1,3,6,7-tetrahydroxy-2-(3-methylbut-2-enyl)xanthone [ | Antimicrobial against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, yeasts, and mycelial fungus [ |
|
| Sore feet, spider bite, bronchitis, dysentery, sterility caused by poison, gastroenteritis [ | Leaves (3.39%) | Bafoussam, West region of Cameroon | Not reported | Not reported |
|
| Gastrointestinal infection, cancer (personal information) | Whole plant (10.22%) | Lebialem, South West region of Cameroon | Not reported | Not reported |
|
| Gastrointestinal infection, cancer (personal information) | Whole plant (7.28%) | Lebialem, South West region of Cameroon | Not reported | Not reported |
|
| Cough, antidote, intestinal diseases, dysentery [ | Leaves (5.18%) and stems bark (5.72%) | Melon, littoral region of Cameroon |
| Antimicrobial activity of the stem bark against |
|
| Antifibromyoma, stomachache, malaria [ | Leaves (10.16%), stems (5.18%), and roots bark (9.26%) | Melon, littoral region of Cameroon | Not reported | Not reported |
aPlants were identified at the Cameroon National Herbarium (HNC); bThe percentage of the methanol extract.
Chemical constituents and extraction yield of the studied plant extracts.
| Studied samples | Phytochemical constituents | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alkaloids | Anthocyanins | Anthraquinones | Flavonoids | Phenols | Saponins | Tannins | Sterols | Triterpenes | |
|
| |||||||||
| Leaves | + | + | − | + | + | − | + | − | − |
| Stem bark | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | − | + |
| Root bark | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | − | + |
| Fruits | + | + | − | + | + | + | + | − | + |
|
| |||||||||
| Leaves | + | − |
| − | + | + | + | + | + |
|
| |||||||||
| Whole plant | + | + |
| + | + | − | + | + | + |
|
| |||||||||
| Whole plant | + | + | − | + | + | − | + | + | − |
|
| |||||||||
| Leaves | + | − | − | − | + | + | + | − | + |
| Stem bark | + | + | − | + | + | − | + | − | − |
|
| |||||||||
| Leaves | + | + | − | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| Stem bark | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | − | + |
| Roots bark | + | + | − | + | + | + | + | − | + |
(+): present; (−): absent.
Figure 1Growth (% of untreated control) of CCRF-CEM leukemia cells in the presence of plant extracts (40 μg/mL) or doxorubicin (10 μg/mL).
Cytotoxicity of the studied extracts towards sensitive and drug-resistant cancer cell lines and normal cells as determined by the resazurin assay.
| Cell lines | Studied samples, IC50 values ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| Doxorubicin | |
| CCRF-CEM | 10.57 ± 2.08 | 9.28 ± 1.01 | 17.32 ± 2.27 | 0.11 ± 0.01 |
| CEM/ADR5000 | 26.14 ± 1.97 (2.47) | 11.72 ± 1.43 (1.26) | 16.44 ± 1.76 (0.95) | 195.12 ± 14.30 (1772) |
| MDA-MB-231 | 16.11 ± 1.62 | 7.52 ± 0.84 | 12.65 ± 1.49 | 1.10 ± 0.01 |
| MDA-MB-231- | 29.6 ± 3.19 (1.49) | 12.93 ± 1.69 (1.71) | 32.02 ± 3.16 (2.53) | 7.83 ± 0.01 (7.11) |
| HCT116 | 19.83 ± 1.66 | 8.59 ± 0.88 | 13.61 ± 1.79 | 1.43 ± 0.02 |
| HCT116 | 22.15 ± 1.97 (1.12) | 9.70 ± 0.72 (1.12) | ∗ (>2.94) | 4.06 ± 0.04 (2.84) |
| U87MG | ∗ | 8.75 ± 1.21 | 22.25 ± 2.76 | 1.06 ± 0.03 |
| U87MG | 34.01 ± 2.78 (<0.85) | 4.09 ± 0.56 (0.47) | 9.14 ± 1.77 (0.41) | 6.11 ± 0.04 (5.76) |
| HepG2 | ∗ (n.a) | 13.60 ± 1.22 (<0.34) | 22.09 ± 2.42 (0.55) | 1.41 ± 0.12 (<0.04) |
| AML12 | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
aThe degree of resistance was determined as the ratio of IC50 value of the resistant/IC50 sensitive cell line.
(∗): >40 µg/mL; n.a: not applicable.
Figure 2Cell-cycle distribution of CCRF-CEM cells treated with plant extractsordoxorubicin at their corresponding IC50 values for 72 h. Data of control and doxorubicin obtained under similar experimental conditions were previously reported [33]. Flow cytometry histograms are available as supportive information (Figure S1).
Figure 3Effect of plant extracts and vinblastine (VIN) on the MMP of CCRF-CEM cells after 24 h of treatment. Data of control and vinblastine under similar experimental conditions were previously reported [33]. Samples were tested at their 1/4 × IC50 (1), 1/2 × IC50 (2), IC50 (3), and 2 × IC50 (4) values. The IC50 values are 0.20 μM for VIN, 10.57 μg/mL (Gladiolus quartinianus whole plant, GQW), 9.28 μg/mL (Vepris soyauxii leaves, VSL), and 17.32 μg/mL (Anonidium mannii leaves, AML).
Figure 4Effect of plant extracts and H2O2 (at 50 μM) on the ROS production of CCRF-CEM cells after 24 h treatment. Samples were tested at their 1/4 × IC50 (1), 1/2 × IC50 (2), IC50 (3), and 2 × IC50 (4) values. The IC50 values are 10.57 μg/mL (Gladiolus quartinianus whole plant, GQW), 9.28 μg/mL (Vepris soyauxii leaves, VSL), and 17.32 μg/mL (Anonidium mannii leaves, AML).