| Literature DB >> 31695610 |
Claudia Robles-Planells1,2, Sofia A Michelson1, Javier Mena1, Daniela Escrig1, Juan L Rojas3, Giselle Sanchez-Guerrero1, Ronny Hernández1, Carlos Barrera-Avalos1,2, Leonel E Rojo1,2, Daniela Sauma4, Alexis M Kalergis5, Mónica Imarai1,2, Ricardo Fernández6, Carolina A Robles1, Elías Leiva-Salcedo1, Rocio Santander7, Alejandro Escobar8, Claudio Acuña-Castillo1,2.
Abstract
Melanoma immunotherapy, specifically the autotransplant of dendritic cells charged with tumors antigens, has shown promising results in clinical trials. The positive clinical effects of this therapy have been associated to increased Th17 response and delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) against to tumor antigens. Some synthetic compounds, such as diphenylcyclopropenone (DPCP), are capable of triggering a DTH response in cutaneous malignancies and also to induce clinically relevant effects against melanoma. In this work, we evaluated Litre extract (LExT), a standardized extract of a Chilean stinging plant, Lithraea caustic (Litre). As Litre plant is known to induce DTH, we used a murine B16 melanoma model to compare the topical and intratumor efficacy of LExT with synthetic DTH inducers (DPCP and 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene [DNCB]). LExt contained mainly long chain catechols and sesquiterpenes. The intratumor injection of LExT induced a significant delay in tumor growth, similarly topical treatment of an established tumor with 0.1% LExT ointment induced a growth delay and even tumor regression in 15% of treated animals. No significant changes were observed on the T-cell populations associated to LExT treatment, and neither DNCB nor DPCP were capable to induce none of the LExT-induced antitumoral effects. Interestingly, our results indicate that LExT induces an antitumor response against melanoma in a mouse model and could bring a new -and affordable- treatment for melanoma in humans.Entities:
Keywords: DTH response; Lithraea caustic; cancer; immunotherapy; topic treatment
Year: 2019 PMID: 31695610 PMCID: PMC6817581 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2019.01201
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pharmacol ISSN: 1663-9812 Impact factor: 5.810
Identity of the chemical compounds of LExT identified by GC/ MS/MS.
| N° | Compound | RIexp | Relative abundance (%) | Identification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Caryophyllene | 1436.73 | 0.68 | RI, MS |
| 2 | Aromandendrene | 1463.90 | 0.17 | RI, MS |
| 3 | Humulene | 1467.29 | 0.62 | RI, MS |
| 4 | γ-Muurolene | 1487.00 | 0.06 | RI, MS |
| 5 | β-Ionone | 1493.52 | 0.11 | RI, MS |
| 6 | α-Muurolene | 1512.03 | 0.14 | RI, MS |
| 7 | Cuparene | 1523.96 | 0.19 | RI, MS |
| 8 | γ-Muurolene | 1528.62 | 0.12 | RI, MS |
| 9 | β-Cadinene | 1535.37 | 0.15 | RI, MS |
| 10 | Calamenene | 1537.47 | 0.12 | RI, MS |
| 11 | Dihydroactinidiolide | 1552.52 | 0.34 | RI, MS |
| 12 | α-Calacorene | 1559.58 | 0.12 | RI, MS |
| 13 | Caryophyllene oxide | 1605.44 | 1.08 | RI, MS |
| 14 | Humulene-1,2-epoxide | 1632.83 | 1.56 | RI, MS |
| 15 | Cadalene | 1693.15 | 0.35 | RI, MS |
| 16 | Neophytadiene | 1833.88 | 0.72 | RI, MS |
| 17 | Perhydrofarnesyl acetone | 1841.28 | 0.34 | RI, MS |
| 18 | Phytol | 2110.86 | 5.12 | RI, MS |
| 19 | 4,8,12,16-Tetramethylheptadecan-4-olide | 2360.75 | 0.44 | RI, MS |
| 20 | Ginkgol | 2493.72 | 2.79 | RI, MS |
| 21 | Tetracosanal | 2629.24 | 1.87 | RI, MS |
| 22 | 3-(Pentadec-10-enyl)-catechol | 2678.84 | 12.48 | RI, MS |
| 23 | Hexacosanal | 2832.25 | 4.41 | RI, MS |
| 24 | 1-Hexacosanol | 2895.97 | 12.52 | RI, MS |
| 25 | Octacosanal | 3036.18 | 6.35 | RI, MS |
| 26 | Octacosanol | 3098.95 | 7.09 | RI, MS |
| 27 | γ-Sitosterol | 3366.40 | 7.61 | RI, MS |
|
|
| |||
|
|
| |||
|
|
| |||
Figure 1Effect of Litre extract (LExT) as a topical treatment on tumor volume in C57BL/6 mice. (A) Treatment diagram. Animals were sensitized and then topically treated with an excipient or 0.1% LExT every two days until the end of the experiment; (B) Kaplan-Meier analysis for tumor onset and (C) Kinetics of tumor growth on control excipient-treated and LExT-treated mice. The abrupt decrease in tumor volume at day 21 in the LExT group indicates a tumor regression in 17% of treated mice. Values are mean ± SEM of 8-12 animals per group.
Figure 2Effect of Litre extract (LExT) intra-tumor treatment in tumor volume in C57BL/6 mice. (A) Treatment diagram. Animals were sensitized and then intratumorally injected with one dose of 50 μL of excipient or 0.1% LExT; (B) Kaplan-Meier analysis for tumor onset and (C) Kinetics of tumor growth on excipient-treated (control) and LExT-treated mice; Values are mean ± SEM of 8 animals per group. (D) Representative images of the tumor in LExT-treated and non-treated animals at the end of the experiment. Values are mean ± SEM of 8-12 animals per group. *p<0.05, Assessed by Kruskal–Wallis one-way ANOVA.
Figure 3Effect of topical Litre extract (LExT) treatment in splenic and tumor-infiltrating CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in C57BL/6 mice. Representative dot plots (left panel) and quantification of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells identified in (A) total tumor-infiltrating and (B) splenocytes cells excised from LExT-treated and non-treated mice. Values are mean ± SEM, *p<0.05 vs. excipients, assessed by the Mann–Whitney test.
Figure 4Effects of Litre extract (LExT) as a topical treatment on spleen levels of Th1, Th17, and T regulatory (Treg) cells in C57BL/6 mice. Representative dot plots (left panel) and quantification of (A) Th1 (CD4+ Tbet+), (B) Th17 (CD4+ RORγ(t)+) and (C) Treg cells (CD4+ CD25+ FoxP3+) in LExT-treated and non-treated mice. Values are Means ± SEMs.
Figure 5Histological characterization of tumors derived from Litre extract (LExT)-treated C56BL/6 mice. Representative images of tumor obtained from Control-treated (left column) and LExT-treated (right column) mice. (A) and (B) show representative images for 5X and 40X magnifications, respectively. Each image is representative of 7-10 tumors obtained from each treatment. TIFs, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes.
Quantification of tumor histopathological features from control and LExT-treated mice.
| Control | LExT | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| low | high | low | high | |||
|
| 5 | 10 | ns | 1 | 8 | * |
|
| 4 | 11 | ns | 3 | 6 | ns |
|
| 4 | 8 | ns | 5 | 4 | ns |
|
| 7 | 8 | ns | 7 | 2 | * |
ns: non-significant difference, Low: mild response, High: severe response, *p < 0.05, assessed by Kruskal–Wallis one-way ANOVA.
Figure 6Effect of DNCB treatment on B16 tumor onset and growth (volume) and CD4+ and CD8+ cells in the tumor and spleen in C57BL/6 mice. (A) Kaplan-Meier analysis for tumor onset on excipient-treated (control) and DNCB-treated mice; (B) Kinetics of tumor growth in DNCB-treated and non-treated animals. * p < 0.05, assessed by Kruskal–Wallis one-way ANOVA. Representative dot plots of CD4+ and CD8+ cells identified in (C) total tumor-infiltrating cell and (D) splenocytes cells excised from DNCB-treated and non-treated mice. Values are mean ± SEM, *p < 0.0 vs. excipients, assessed by the Mann–Whitney test.
Figure 7Effect of DPCP treatment on B16 tumor onset and growth (volume) and CD4+ and CD8+ cells in the tumor and spleen in C57BL/6 mice. (A) Kaplan-Meier analysis for tumor onset on excipient-treated (control) and DPCP-treated mice; (B) Kinetics of tumor growth in DPCP-treated and non-treated animals. Values are Means ± SEMs.