| Literature DB >> 28959643 |
Jasbir Kour1, Md Niamat Ali1, Hilal Ahmad Ganaie1, Nahida Tabassum2.
Abstract
In the present study, we evaluated the potential of the plant E. arvense against the cytotoxic and mutagenic effects induced by cyclophosphamide (chemotherapeutic agent) in the bone marrow cells of mice using the Chromosome assay (CA) and Mitotic index (MI) in vivo as the biomarkers. The study was performed following 3 protocols: pre-treatment, simultaneous treatment and post-treatment with the ethanolic extract of the plant. The results demonstrated that the plant extract was not cytotoxic and mutagenic and has a protective effect against the mutagenicity induced by cyclophosphamide in pre, simultaneous and post treatments and against its cytotoxicity as well. Because of its ability to prevent chromosomal damage, E. arvense is likely to open an interesting field concerning its possible use in clinical applications, most importantly in cancer as a chemopreventive agent or even as a coadjuvant to chemotherapy to reduce the side effects associated with it.Entities:
Keywords: Antimutagenicity; Chromosomal aberration assay; Equisetum arvense; GC–MS analysis; Mitotic index
Year: 2017 PMID: 28959643 PMCID: PMC5615123 DOI: 10.1016/j.toxrep.2017.05.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Toxicol Rep ISSN: 2214-7500
Phytoconstituents identified in ethanolic extract of Equisetum arvense by GC–MS.
| S.no | Retention time | Compound | % Area | Molecular formula | Molecular weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.891 | Cyclopentanol | 1.91 | C5H10O | 86 |
| 2 | 6.118 | Azulene | 2.27 | C10H8 | 128 |
| 3 | 6.317 | 4-Penten-2-one, 4-methyl | 0.51 | C6H10O | 98 |
| 4 | 7.899 | 2-methoxy-4-vinylphenol | 6.43 | C9H10O2 | 150 |
| 5 | 8.917 | 1-(2,6-dimethyl-4-propoxy-phenyl)-propan-1-one | 0.57 | C14H20O2 | 220 |
| 6 | 10.018 | 4-(2,4,4-Trimethyl-cyclohexa-1,5-dienyl)-but-3-en-2-one | 0.88 | C13H18O | 190 |
| 7 | 10.301 | Phenol, 2,4-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl) | 0.58 | C14H22O | 206 |
| 8 | 10.689 | 2,2,4-Trimethyl-5-oxo-2,5-dihydro-3-furancarboxylic acid | 0.44 | C8H10O4 | 170 |
| 9 | 10.769 | 2(4H)-Benzofuranone, 5,6,7,7a-tetrahydro-4,4,7a-trimethyl | 0.13 | C11H16O2 | 180 |
| 10 | 11.042 | 2,4-cyclooctadien-1-ol, 1-(1-methoxycyclopropyl)-6,6-dimethyl | 0.37 | C14H22O2 | 222 |
| 11 | 11.252 | Megastigmatrienone | 0.89 | C13H18O | 190 |
| 12 | 13.049 | 1-Propanone, 1-(2-aminophenyl)-3-methoxy | 0.63 | C10H13NO2 | 179 |
| 13 | 13.465 | Phosphonic acid, dioctadecyl ester | 0.38 | C36H75O3P | 586 |
| 14 | 13.775 | 13-octadecenal | 0.31 | C18H34O | 266 |
| 15 | 13.970 | 2,6,10-trimethyl,14-ethylene-14-pentadecne | 16.36 | C20H38 | 278 |
| 16 | 14.041 | 2-Hexadecene, 3,7,11,15-tetramethyl | 1.57 | C20H40 | 280 |
| 17 | 14.367 | 1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-methylpropyl) ester | 0.34 | C16H22O4 | 278 |
| 18 | 14.570 | Hexadecane, 2,6,10,14-tetramethyl | 0.15 | C20H42 | 282 |
| 19 | 14.859 | Hexadecanoic acid, methyl ester | 1.99 | C17H34O2 | 270 |
| 20 | 15.092 | 1-hexadecen-3-ol, 3,5,11,15-tetramethyl | 0.09 | C20H40O | 296 |
| 21 | 15.301 | n-Hexadecanoic acid | 15.82 | C16H32O2 | 256 |
| 22 | 15.524 | Hexadecanoic acid, ethyl ester | 2.39 | C18H36O2 | 284 |
| 23 | 15.615 | Cis-9-Hexadecenal | 0.64 | C16H30O | 238 |
| 24 | 15.822 | Hexadecanal | 0.17 | C16H32O | 240 |
| 25 | 16.433 | Oxirane, tetradecyl | 0.35 | C16H32O | 240 |
| 26 | 16.517 | Hexadecane, 1-iodo | 0.26 | C16H33I | 352 |
| 27 | 16.576 | 9-Octadecenoic acid, methyl ester | 3.82 | C19H36O2 | 296 |
| 28 | 16.724 | Phytol | 15.2 | C20H40O | 296 |
| 29 | 17.054 | Oleic acid | 7.64 | C18H34O2 | 282 |
| 30 | 17.212 | Ethyl (9z,12z)-9,12-octadecadienoate | 7.16 | C20H36O2 | 308 |
| 31 | 17.653 | 2,6,10-trimethyl,14-ethylene-14-pentadecne | 0.58 | C20H38 | 278 |
| 32 | 18.373 | Fumaric acid, 2-dimethylaminoethyl octadecyl ester | 1.89 | C26H49NO4 | 439 |
| 33 | 18.566 | 9-octadecenoic acid (z)-, methyl ester | 0.24 | C19H36O2 | 296 |
| 34 | 18.837 | Eicosanoic acid, methyl ester | 1.84 | C21H42O2 | 326 |
| 35 | 19.671 | Heptadecanoic acid, ethyl ester | 0.57 | C19H38O2 | 298 |
| 36 | 20.805 | 3-Cyclopentylpropionic acid, 2-dimethylaminoethyl ester | 0.77 | C12H23NO2 | 213 |
| 37 | 21.474 | cis-9-Hexadecenal | 0.89 | C16H30O | 238 |
| 38 | 37.106 | Stigmast-5-en-3-ol | 2.97 | C29H50O | 414 |
| Total | 100 |
Fig. 1GC–MS chromatogram of Ethanolic extract of Equisetum arvense.
Chromosomal aberrations observed during ethanolic extract sub chronic treatment in the bone marrow cells of Cyclophosphamide treated mice.
| Treatment Group | Dose mg/kg | TMS | Chromosomal Aberrations% | Total abb. Mean(%) ±SD | % Reduction | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frg | Cr | Csb | Ctb | Cg | St | Ex | |||||
| Distilled water (NC) | – | 500 | 2.4 | 3 | 0.6 | 3 | 1.6 | 0.2 | – | 9.2 ± 0.84 | – |
| Cyclophosphamide (PC) | 50 | 500 | 6 | 16.2 | 20.6 | 21.2 | 7.2 | 4.2 | 0.6 | 68.8 ± 1.48 | – |
| Eth-EA alone (gavage) | 500 | 500 | 2.4 | 2.2 | 0.8 | 2.6 | 2.2 | 1.2 | 0.2 | 9.4 ± 0.541 | – |
| Eth-EA pre-treatment (gavage) | 500 | 500 | 5.4 | 5.4 | 0.4 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 2.4 | 1.2 | 17.6 ± 0.55a | 85.91 |
| Eth-EA sim-treatment (gavage) | 500 | 500 | 3 | 4.6 | 1 | 3 | 2.4 | 1 | 0.8 | 13.4 ± 0.89a | 92.95 |
| Eth-EA post-treatment (gavage) | 500 | 500 | 4.2 | 1.8 | 0.4 | 2.4 | 1.4 | 1.2 | 0.6 | 10.6 ± 1.14a | 97.65 |
Eth: ethanolic extract, EA: E.arvense, TMS: total metaphasic plates studied, Frg: fragment, Cr: chromosomal ring, Csb: chromosome break, Ctb: chromatid break, Cg: gap, St: sticky chromosomes, Ex: exchange. Values with different letter superscript differ significantly (p ˂ 0.01: highly significant) from the positive control whereas values with numeric superscript do not differ significantly (p ˂ 0.01: highly significant) from the negative control (Mann Whiteny U Test). Gaps have been mentioned but not included in the total aberrations.
Mitotic index of mice bone marrow cells observed during ethanolic extract sub chronic treatment.
| Treatment Group | DOSE mg/kg | Total cells analyzed | % Mitotic Index±SD |
|---|---|---|---|
| Distilled water (NC) | – | 1000 | 7.36 ± 1.14 |
| Cyclophosphamide (PC) | 50 | 1000 | 4.64 ± 1.14 |
| Eth-EA alone (gavage) | 500 | 1000 | 7.1 ± 0.841 |
| Eth-EA pre-treatment (gavage) | 500 | 1000 | 6.16 ± 2.30a |
| Eth-EA sim-treatment (gavage) | 500 | 1000 | 6.98 ± 2.17a |
| Eth-EA post-treatment(gavage) | 500 | 1000 | 7.1 ± 1.22a |
NC: negative control, PC: positive control (Cyclophosphamide), Eth: ethanolic extract, EA: Equisetum arvense. Values with different letter superscript differ significantly (p ˂ 0.01: highly significant) from the positive control whereas values with numeric superscript do not differ significantly (p > 0.05) from the negative control (Mann Whiteny U Test).
Fig. 2Percentage reduction in chromosomal aberrations by different treatments with ethanol extract of Equisetum arvense.
Fig. 3% Mitotic Index of the bone marrow cells in different treatment groups.