Navakoon Kaewtunjai1, Rawiwan Wongpoomchai1, Arisa Imsumran1, Wilart Pompimon2, Anan Athipornchai3, Apichart Suksamrarn4, T Randall Lee5, Wirote Tuntiwechapikul1. 1. Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand. 2. Laboratory of Natural Products, Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science and Center of Innovation in Chemistry, Lampang Rajabhat University, Lampang 52100, Thailand. 3. Department of Chemistry, Center of Excellence for Innovation in Chemistry, Burapha University, Chon Buri 20131, Thailand. 4. Department of Chemistry and Center of Excellence for Innovation in Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Ramkhamhaeng University, Bangkok 10240, Thailand. 5. Department of Chemistry and the Texas Center for Superconductivity, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204-5003, United States.
Abstract
Replicative senescence, which is caused by telomere shortening from the end replication problem, is considered one of the tumor-suppressor mechanisms in eukaryotes. However, most cancers escape this replicative senescence by reactivating telomerase, an enzyme that extends the 3'-ends of the telomeres. Previously, we reported the telomerase inhibitory effect of a crude Zingiber officinale extract (ZOE), which suppressed hTERT expression, leading to a reduction in hTERT protein and telomerase activity in A549 lung cancer cells. In the present study, we found that ZOE-induced telomere shortening and cellular senescence during the period of 60 days when these A549 cells were treated with subcytotoxic doses of ZOE. Using assay-guided fractionation and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry analysis, we found that the major compounds in the active subfractions were paradols and shogaols of various chain lengths. The results from studies of pure 6-paradol and 6-shogaol confirmed that these two compounds could suppress hTERT expression as well as telomerase activity in A549 cells. These results suggest that these paradols and shogaols are likely the active compounds in ZOE that suppress hTERT expression and telomerase activity in these cells. Furthermore, ZOE was found to be nontoxic and had an anticlastogenic effect against diethylnitrosamine-induced liver micronucleus formation in rats. These findings suggest that ginger extract can potentially be useful in dietary cancer prevention.
Replicative senescence, which is caused by telomere shortening from the end replication problem, is considered one of the tumor-suppressor mechanisms in eukaryotes. However, most cancers escape this replicative senescence by reactivating telomerase, an enzyme that extends the 3'-ends of the telomeres. Previously, we reported the telomerase inhibitory effect of a crude Zingiber officinale extract (ZOE), which suppressed hTERT expression, leading to a reduction in hTERT protein and telomerase activity in A549lung cancer cells. In the present study, we found that ZOE-induced telomere shortening and cellular senescence during the period of 60 days when these A549 cells were treated with subcytotoxic doses of ZOE. Using assay-guided fractionation and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry analysis, we found that the major compounds in the active subfractions were paradols and shogaols of various chain lengths. The results from studies of pure 6-paradol and 6-shogaol confirmed that these two compounds could suppress hTERT expression as well as telomerase activity in A549 cells. These results suggest that these paradols and shogaols are likely the active compounds in ZOE that suppress hTERT expression and telomerase activity in these cells. Furthermore, ZOE was found to be nontoxic and had an anticlastogenic effect against diethylnitrosamine-induced liver micronucleus formation in rats. These findings suggest that ginger extract can potentially be useful in dietary cancer prevention.
Telomeres are specialized
nucleoprotein structures found at the
ends of all eukaryotic chromosomes. Telomeres maintain chromosome
stability by preventing nucleolytic degradation and end-to-end fusion[1] as well as facilitating chromosome segregation
during meiosis.[2] The long repetitive telomeric
DNA sequence and the specific telomeric protein complex called shelterin
allow the telomere to form a loop structure called T-loop, which differentiates
telomeric DNA from other double-stranded DNA breaks.[3] Telomeric DNA is shortened 50–200 base pairs during
each round of DNA replication because of the end replication problem.[4] The long telomeric DNA allows somatic cells to
replicate for a number of cell divisions until one of the cell’s
telomeric DNAs is shortened to a critical length when it triggers
the irreversible cell cycle arrest called “replicative senescence”.[5,6]Replicative senescence is generally considered a tumor-suppressor
mechanism.[7] To escape replicative senescence,
the majority of humancancers maintain their telomere length by reactivating
telomerase, an enzyme that normally adds telomeric DNA to the 3′-ends
of chromosomes in germline cells.[8,9] The isolated
active human telomerase consists of two sets of human telomerase reverse
transcriptase (hTERT), human telomeric RNA (hTR), and dyskerin.[10] Although both hTERT and hTR are necessary for
telomerase activity, the transcriptional regulation of hTERT expression is the principal mechanism for controlling the telomerase
activity.[9,11]Dietary phytochemicals have attracted
considerable interest for
cancer prevention because of at least three factors: (1) potential
therapeutic effects, (2) low cost, and (3) good bioavailability.[12,13] However, applying plant chemicals for cancer prevention requires
an in-depth knowledge of their mechanisms of action and their biosafety.
One of the attractive targets for cancer prevention is telomerase
because telomerase-specific inhibition causes cancer cells and cancer-initiating
cells to enter replicative senescence and apoptosis without any significant
effect on normal somatic cells.[14,15] A literature search
for plant-derived telomerase inhibitors found a few natural phytochemicals
that inhibited telomerase in cancer cells; these include curcumin,
epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG), resveratrol, genistein, sulforaphane,
silibinin, and pristimerin, among others.[16] However, only a few reports show the long-term effects of these
phytochemicals on telomere shortening and cellular senescence because
the cancer cells must grow and normally divide for several generations
in a nontoxic dose in order to attain a discernible telomere shortening.
This aspect is crucially important because the viability of using
dietary phytochemicals for cancer prevention depends on these agents
being effective at nontoxic doses.For millennia, the ginger
(Zingiber officinale Roscoe) rhizome
has been traditionally used for various ailments, including
many gastrointestinal disorders such as nausea, vomiting, and abdominal
spasm, as well as rheumatic disorders, arthritis, and muscular discomfort.[17,18] In recent years, scientists have revealed that various chemicals
found in ginger rhizome—most notably gingerols, paradols, and
shogaols—possess anticancer properties as shown in many experimental
models.[19−22] Previously, we reported the telomerase inhibitory effect of the
crude ethyl acetate fraction of Z. officinale extract (ZOE), which suppressed hTERT expression,
leading to a reduction in the hTERT protein and telomerase activity
in A549lung cancer cells.[23] However, there
were two remaining important questions that we wanted to address;
these are as follows: (1) would telomerase suppression by the ginger
extract lead to telomere shortening and cellular senescence at subcytotoxic
doses? (2) What are the active compounds in the ginger extract that
suppress hTERT expression? In this report, we demonstrated that ZOE
induced telomere shortening and cellular senescence during long-term
treatment when these A549 cells were treated with subcytotoxic doses
of ZOE. We then identified the telomerase suppressors in the crude
ginger extract using assay-guided fractionation and gas chromatography/mass
spectrometry (GC/MS) analysis. Furthermore, we evaluated the safety,
clastogenicity, and anticlastogenicity of this extract in rats.
Results
We previously reported that ZOE suppressed hTERT expression in A549lung cancer cells, leading to the decrement of
the hTERT protein and telomerase activity.[23] In the present study, ZOE was extracted in the same manner, and
the thin-layer chromatography (TLC) fingerprint of ZOE was similar
to what we previously reported (Supporting Information, Figure S1). The IC50 growth inhibitory effect of ZOE
in A549 cells was 58 ± 2 μg/mL, compared to 50 ± 4
μg/mL as previously reported.[23]
ZOE Suppressed hTERT Expression and Telomerase
Activity in A549 Lung Cancer Cells
We retested the new batch
of ZOE for the suppression of hTERT expression and
telomerase activity in A549lung cancer cells. For the gene expression
assay, we incubated the A549 cells with the indicated concentrations
of ZOE for 24 h, before their RNAs were extracted and assayed by semiquantitative
reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) analysis.
For each gene expression assay, we carefully chose the PCR cycle so
that the detected amplified product could represent the initial amount
of each cDNA in the reaction (Supporting Information, Figure S2). As shown in Figure A, the hTERT and c-Myc mRNA expressions were suppressed after the A549 cells were treated
with ZOE for 24 h in a concentration-dependent manner. On the other
hand, the housekeeping gene GAPDH and other telomerase-related
genes (hTR, TRF1, TRF2, and hTEP1) were not affected. For the telomerase
activity assay, we incubated the A549 cells with the indicated concentrations
of ZOE for 48 h. The crude protein was then extracted and used as
the telomerase source in a modified telomeric repeat amplification
protocol (TRAP) assay. Figure B demonstrates that the telomerase activity of the A549 cells
treated with ZOE for 48 h was also suppressed in a concentration-dependent
manner. These results confirmed our initial contention that our new
batch of ZOE could suppress hTERT expression and
telomerase activity in A549 cells.
Figure 1
Short-term treatment of ZOE inhibits hTERT expression
(A) and reduces telomerase activity in A549 lung cancer cells (B).
(A) To assay for gene expression, the A549 cells were incubated with
the indicated concentrations of ZOE for 24 h before their RNAs were
extracted and assayed by semiquantitative RT-PCR analysis. (B) To
assay the effect on telomerase activity, the A549 cells were incubated
with the indicated concentrations of ZOE for 48 h before the crude
protein extract was used as the source of telomerase in a modified
TRAP assay. Lane N represents the negative control experiment when
telomerase was heat-denatured. IC and RC represent the internal control
and recovery control.
Short-term treatment of ZOE inhibits hTERT expression
(A) and reduces telomerase activity in A549lung cancer cells (B).
(A) To assay for gene expression, the A549 cells were incubated with
the indicated concentrations of ZOE for 24 h before their RNAs were
extracted and assayed by semiquantitative RT-PCR analysis. (B) To
assay the effect on telomerase activity, the A549 cells were incubated
with the indicated concentrations of ZOE for 48 h before the crude
protein extract was used as the source of telomerase in a modified
TRAP assay. Lane N represents the negative control experiment when
telomerase was heat-denatured. IC and RC represent the internal control
and recovery control.
Long-Term Treatment with ZOE Led to Telomere Shortening in A549
Cells
Most cancers treated with a telomerase suppressor should
exhibit telomere shortening after successive rounds of cell replication,
just like normal somatic cells. In order for this to happen and be
observed, the dose of the agent must allow the cancer cells to proliferate
normally for several passages. In this long-term treatment study,
we treated the A549 cells with two subcytotoxic doses of ZOE (5 and
10 μg/mL) added in the culture media, with the changing of fresh
media every 3 days and subculturing every 6 days for up to 60 days.
Cells were collected and counted with each 6 day passage. We then
plotted a graph between the cumulative number of population doublings
and time (Figure A),
which shows that the A549 cells in all three sets were steadily proliferating
during the course of the 60 day experiment, although the population
doublings in the experimental sets with ZOE (5 and 10 μg/mL)
were a little less than those in the control set.
Figure 2
Population doublings
(A) and telomere shortening (B) in long-term
treatment of A549 cells with subcytotoxic doses of ZOE. A549 cells
were incubated with or without (control) the indicated concentration
of ZOE supplemented in the culture media, with a change of fresh media
every 3 days and subculturing of the cells every 6 days, up to 60
days. (A) Cells from each passage were counted, and the growth curves
between the cumulative numbers of population doublings were plotted
against time. (B) A549 cells collected on days 6, 30, and 60 were
subjected to the telomere length assay. The genomic DNA was extracted,
and the mean TRFs were analyzed using the TeloTAGGG Telomere Length Assay kit. M represents a molecular weight marker.
Population doublings
(A) and telomere shortening (B) in long-term
treatment of A549 cells with subcytotoxic doses of ZOE. A549 cells
were incubated with or without (control) the indicated concentration
of ZOE supplemented in the culture media, with a change of fresh media
every 3 days and subculturing of the cells every 6 days, up to 60
days. (A) Cells from each passage were counted, and the growth curves
between the cumulative numbers of population doublings were plotted
against time. (B) A549 cells collected on days 6, 30, and 60 were
subjected to the telomere length assay. The genomic DNA was extracted,
and the mean TRFs were analyzed using the TeloTAGGG Telomere Length Assay kit. M represents a molecular weight marker.A number of A549 cells collected
in days 6, 30, and 60 were subjected
to the telomere length assay. We first digested the extracted genomic
DNA with Hinf I and Rsa I, before
the telomere restriction fragments (TRFs) were analyzed by Southern
blotting using a TeloTAGGG Telomere Length Assay
kit. As shown in Figure B, the mean TRF lengths of the experimental sets (cells treated with
ZOE) were less than that of the control set in a time- and concentration-dependent
manner during the period of the 60 day study. In the control set,
the mean TRF length remained relatively stable at 3.3 kb. However,
it decreased from 3.3 to 3.1 kb on day 30 and then to 3.0 kb on day
60 in the cells treated with 5 μg/mL ZOE. With the treatment
of 10 μg/mL ZOE, the decrease was much more noticeable, in which
the mean TRF length decreased from 3.3 to 3.0 kb on day 30 and to
2.6 kb on day 60. On the basis of these results, we conclude that
ZOE induces telomere shortening through the suppression of hTERT expression and telomerase activity in these cells.
Effect on Cell Senescence after Long-Term Treatment with ZOE
One of the major causes of cellular senescence is telomere shortening.
One or a few critically short telomeres can trigger DNA damage response
pathways that eventually lead to cellular senescence.[7,24] From the experiments above, treating A549 cells with subcytotoxic
doses of ZOE led to telomere shortening. On the basis of this finding,
we further investigated whether this telomere shortening would accompany
with the manifestation of cellular senescence. We conducted a senescence-associated
β-galactosidase activity assay on the A549 cells collected from
the long-term treatment study mentioned above. The A549 cells collected
on days 30 and 60 were recultured in a six-well plate and allowed
to grow for 24 h, before they were fixed, stained with X-gal solution,
and photographed under a phase-contrast microscope. The blue-stained
cells indicated the β-galactosidase positive cells, which are
often accompanied with morphological changes. As shown in Figure A, there are more
blue-stained cells in the experimental sets in which A549 cells were
treated with ZOE than those found in the control set. The cells in
each set were counted, and a graph between the percentage of the β-galactosidase
positive cells and time was plotted (Figure B). In the control set, the percentage of
the β-galactosidase positive cells remained around 10–15%
of the cells collected on days 30 and 60. However, after the A549
cells were treated with 5 μg/mL ZOE, the percentage of the β-galactosidase
positive cells increased to 35% on day 30 and then to 55% on day 60,
respectively. The percentage of the β-galactosidase positive
cells was more profound after the A549 cells were treated with 10
μg/mL ZOE, with the percentage of the β-galactosidase
positive cells rising to 43% on day 30 and then to 69% on day 60.
Figure 3
Senescence-associated
β-galactosidase positive cells (A)
and percentage of these cells (B) after long-term treatment with subcytotoxic
doses of ZOE. The A549 cells from the long-term treatment with the
subcytotoxic dose experiment, collected on the indicated days, were
subjected to the senescence-associated β-galactosidase activity
assay. The A549 cells (1 × 105 cells) were recultured
in a six-well plate and allowed to grow for 24 h. The cells were fixed,
stained with X-gal solution, and photographed under a phase-contrast
microscope. (A) Morphological changes and β-galactosidase positive
cells (blue-stained cells) are indicators of cell senescence. (B)
Cells in each set were counted, and the percentage of the β-galactosidase
positive cells was plotted against time. Differences are considered
statistically significant when *p < 0.05 or **p < 0.01, compared to the control group.
Senescence-associated
β-galactosidase positive cells (A)
and percentage of these cells (B) after long-term treatment with subcytotoxic
doses of ZOE. The A549 cells from the long-term treatment with the
subcytotoxic dose experiment, collected on the indicated days, were
subjected to the senescence-associated β-galactosidase activity
assay. The A549 cells (1 × 105 cells) were recultured
in a six-well plate and allowed to grow for 24 h. The cells were fixed,
stained with X-gal solution, and photographed under a phase-contrast
microscope. (A) Morphological changes and β-galactosidase positive
cells (blue-stained cells) are indicators of cell senescence. (B)
Cells in each set were counted, and the percentage of the β-galactosidase
positive cells was plotted against time. Differences are considered
statistically significant when *p < 0.05 or **p < 0.01, compared to the control group.
Effect on Clonogenicity after Long-Term Treatment
with ZOE
Cellular senescence is the state by which mitotic
cells irreversibly
stop dividing. This inability to divide can be tested using a simple
colony-forming assay in which individual cells are spread on a tissue
culture plate and allowed to form colonies. To evaluate the effect
on the clonogenicity of A549 cells after long-term treatment with
ZOE, the A549 cells collected on days 30 and 60 from the long-term
treatment study were seeded at a low density (2 × 103 cells) in a 10 cm tissue culture dish and allowed to form colonies
for a period of 14 days. The colonies were then stained with crystal
violet and digitally scanned. The number of colonies was determined
using the ImageQuant TL software. Figure A shows the pictures of the colony formation
of the A549 cells collected from the untreated control set and the
treated experimental sets (with 5 and 10 μg/mL of ZOE) on days
30 and 60, respectively. The colonies from the untreated control set
are densely populated, whereas the colonies from the treated experimental
sets are less populous in a time- and concentration-dependent manner.
The numbers of colonies were quantified, and the percentage of colony
formations was compared to the control and plotted against time. The
graph in Figure B
shows that after the A549 cells were treated with 5 μg/mL ZOE,
the percentage of colony formation decreased to 48% on day 30 and
to 42% on day 60. After the A549 cells were treated with 10 μg/mL
of ZOE, the percentage of colony formation decreased to 42% on day
30 and to 35% on day 60. From all of the experiments presented above,
we conclude that ZOE suppresses hTERT expression
and telomerase activity in A549 cells. The long-term treatment with
subcytotoxic doses of ZOE in this cancer cell line leads to a gradual
loss of telomere length, an induction of cellular senescence, and
a reduction in clonogenicity.
Figure 4
Clonogenicity of A549 cells (A) and percentage
of colony formation
(B) after long-term treatment with subcytotoxic doses of ZOE. The
A549 cells collected on the indicated days were subjected to the colony
formation assay. The low number of cells (2 × 103 cells)
was recultured on a Petri dish. The cells were allowed to form colonies
for 14 days and stained with crystal violet. Each plate was then scanned
by a phosphoimager, and the colonies were counted using ImageQuant
TL software. The percent colony formation was then plotted against
time. Differences are considered statistically significant when *p < 0.05 or **p < 0.01, compared
to the control group.
Clonogenicity of A549 cells (A) and percentage
of colony formation
(B) after long-term treatment with subcytotoxic doses of ZOE. The
A549 cells collected on the indicated days were subjected to the colony
formation assay. The low number of cells (2 × 103 cells)
was recultured on a Petri dish. The cells were allowed to form colonies
for 14 days and stained with crystal violet. Each plate was then scanned
by a phosphoimager, and the colonies were counted using ImageQuant
TL software. The percent colony formation was then plotted against
time. Differences are considered statistically significant when *p < 0.05 or **p < 0.01, compared
to the control group.
Identification of Telomerase Suppressors in ZOE
We
employed assay-guided fractionation and GC/MS analysis to identify
the active compounds in ZOE that suppress telomerase expression and
activity in A549 cells. ZOE was purified by column chromatography
to obtain four fractions: E1–E4. The ZOE and its fractions
were fingerprinted by TLC and high performance liquid chromatography
(HPLC; Supporting Information, Figures
S1, S3, and S4). The amount of 6-gingerol in these fractions was also
quantified by HPLC. The E1 and E2 fractions contained an undetectable
amount of 6-gingerol, whereas the E3 and E4 fractions contained about
30 and 40% of 6-gingerol, respectively. The semiquantitative RT-PCR
analysis found that only the E2 fraction significantly suppressed hTERT expression in a dose-dependent manner, whereas the
E3 and E4 fractions, which contained a large amount of 6-gingerol,
were not found to suppress hTERT expression (Supporting Information, Figure S5A). These results
confirm our previously published finding that 6-gingerol does not
suppress hTERT expression.[23]We further fractionated the E2 fraction by column chromatography
into four more subfractions: E2.1–E2.4. The results from RT-PCR
studies showed that all of these subfractions could suppress the expression
of hTERT in A549 cells (Supporting Information, Figure S5B). These subfractions were then subjected
to the same telomerase activity assay as previously described. All
four subfractions were found to suppress the telomerase activity in
a concentration-dependent manner (Supporting Information, Figure S6).We then employed GC/MS to identify the compounds
within these subfractions.
The GC chromatograms, GC data, and selected GC/MS spectra are shown
in the Supporting Information (Figures
S7–S10). By using the fragment analysis of the ginger compounds
reported by Tao et al.[25] and Jolad et al.,[26] we found that these active subfractions contained
mostly paradols and shogaols of varying chain lengths (Table ). Therefore, we conclude that
paradols and shogaols are likely to be the active compounds in ZOE
that are responsible for the suppression of hTERT expression and telomerase activity. Although there are concerns
about the thermal degradation and dehydration of compounds containing
a β-hydroxyketone group such as gingerols to aliphatic aldehyde,
zingerone, and the corresponding shogaols under GC condition,[26] we do not believe the paradols and shogaols
we found in the E2.1–E2.4 subfractions were the products of
thermal degradation or dehydration because gingerols were absent in
the active E2 fraction and were found only in E3 and E4 fractions.
Table 1
Major Compounds in the E2 Subfractions
by GC/MS Analysisa
E2.1
E2.2
E2.3
E2.4
11-paradol (75%)
11-paradol (26%)
7-paradol (42%)
6-shogaol (68%)
13-paradol (9%)
7-paradol (22%)
10-shogaol (33%)
8-shogaol (8%)
Bisabolene (7%)
6-paradol (22%)
11-paradol (9%)
10-shogaol (6%)
9-paradol (16%)
6-paradol (6%)
7-paradol (5%)
(%) represents
percentage of the
peak area in GC chromatogram.
(%) represents
percentage of the
peak area in GC chromatogram.Although the data and results above suggest that paradols and shogaols
are likely the active compounds in ZOE and responsible for the suppression
of hTERT expression and telomerase activity, we cannot
rule out the possibility that some minor ingredients in the extract
are responsible for the observed effects. To verify whether the activities
arose specifically from paradols and shogaols, we obtained pure 6-paradol
and pure 6-shogaol as representative compounds and also pure 6-gingerol
as a negative control. The same gene expression analysis by semiquantitative
RT-PCR and telomerase activity assay were performed. The results are
shown in the Supporting Information (Figure
S11). The results showed that 6-paradol and 6-shogaol significantly
suppressed hTERT expression in a dose-dependent manner,
whereas 6-gingerol only slightly suppressed the hTERT expression at a higher concentration. Telomerase activity in the
cells treated with 6-paradol and 6-shogaol, but not 6-gingerol, was
also suppressed in a concentration-dependent manner. These results
confirmed that the suppression of hTERT expression
and telomerase activity found in ZOE arose from the paradols and shogaols
rather than the gingerols.The chemical structures of gingerols,
shogaols, and paradols (Figure ) are similar in
that they all contain the 4-hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl nucleus linked
to different side chains of various lengths at position 1. Gingerols
contain a β-hydroxy ketone side chain, whereas shogaols contain
an α,β-unsaturated ketone side chain and paradols contain
only one ketone group in their alkyl side chain. In terms of chemistry,
shogaols are the dehydrated form of gingerols and paradols are the
hydrogenated form of shogaols. The loss of activity to suppress hTERT expression and telomerase activity in gingerols might
be due to the presence of the β-hydroxy group in the hydrocarbon
side chain. The length of the side chain in paradols and shogaols
might not affect the activity because all four subfractions (E2.1–E2.4),
which have different compositions of paradols and shogaols (Table ), had the capacity
to suppress hTERT expression and telomerase activity.
Figure 5
Chemical
structures of gingerols, shogaols, and paradols.
Chemical
structures of gingerols, shogaols, and paradols.
Influence of ZOE on Acute Toxicity and DEN-Induced Clastogenicity
in Rats
To evaluate the biosafety of our ZOE, the same ZOE
used in the above experiments was assayed for acute toxicity, clastogenicity,
and anticlastogenicity in rats. The results from the acute toxicity
test showed that rats did not show any signs of toxicity or mortality
after treating with the single maximum dose of 5000 mg/kg bw of ZOE
for 14 days. Their body weight, food and water intake, and relative
organ weight were also similar to those from the control group (Supporting Information, Tables S1 and S2). These
results suggest that ZOE is safe in rats, which is in agreement with
the ranking of ginger in the generally recognized as safe (GRAS) list
by the Food and Drug Administration.[27]We then employed the liver micronucleus assay to investigate the
clastogenicity and anticlastogenicity of ZOE in rats. The treatment
scheme is illustrated in Figure . Male Wistar rats were divided into four groups: I
and II were used to evaluate the clastogenicity effect, whereas III
and IV were used to evaluate the anticlastogenicity effect. The results
from group II, rats treated with 500 mg/kg bw of ZOE for 28 days,
indicate that ZOE had no clastogenic effects on rat liver because
their final body weight, liver micronucleus formation, and mitotic
index were not significantly different from those found in the control
group (group I). However, the results from groups III and IV suggest
that ZOE had an anticlastogenic effect against diethylnitrosamine
(DEN)-induced liver micronucleus formation in rats. When rats in group
III were injected with two doses of 30 mg/kg bw of DEN on days 22
and 25, their average final body weight reduced significantly (−10.7%),
and there was a significant increase in liver micronucleus formation
(+525.3%), with no significant change in the mitotic index. On the
contrary, the group IV rats that were treated with 500 mg/kg bw of
ZOE for 28 days, along with two doses of 30 mg/kg bw of DEN on days
22 and 25, were found to have less reduction in their average final
body weight (−6.7%), and the number of micronucleated hepatocytes
significantly decreased (−49.8%) compared to the positive control
group (group III). The data from these clastogenicity and anticlastogenicity
experiments are summarized in Table . Our results here are in agreement with previously
published articles, which found that the ginger extract had a protective
effect against DEN-induced liver carcinogenesis in a rat model,[28] and it had anticancer and anti-inflammatory
effects through the reduction of NF-κB and TNF-α in ethionine-induced
hepatoma rats.[29]
Figure 6
Protocol for clastogenicity
and anticlastogenicity determination
of ZOE in rats. Male Wistar rats were divided into four groups. Group
1 is a negative control group, whereas group 3 is a positive control
group. Group 2 is the experiment group to determine the clastogenic
effect of ZOE, whereas group 4 is the experiment group to determine
the anticlastogenic effect of ZOE. The liver micronucleus was used
as the end-point marker.
Table 2
Influence of ZOE on DEN-Induced Clastogenicity
in Ratsa
rat body weight (g)
test group
initial
final
MNH (per 1000 HEP)
mitotic
index
negative control (5% Tween 80)
113 ± 3
289 ± 14
1.62 ± 0.85
3.36 ± 0.45
ZOE (500 mg/kg bw)
112 ± 7
284 ± 5
1.79 ± 0.45
3.13 ± 0.36
positive control (DEN + 5% Tween 80)
110 ± 6
258 ± 11*
8.51 ± 1.82*
3.25 ± 0.33
DEN + ZOE (DEN + 500 mg/kg bw)
110 ± 6
265 ± 4*
4.24 ± 1.02**
3.39 ± 0.52
Values expressed
as mean ±
SD; MNH: micronucleated hepatocytes; HEP: hepatocytes; DEN; diethylnitrosamine;
(*) indicates statistical significance at p <
0.05 compared to the negative control group; (**) indicates statistical
significance at p < 0.05 compared to the positive
control group.
Protocol for clastogenicity
and anticlastogenicity determination
of ZOE in rats. Male Wistar rats were divided into four groups. Group
1 is a negative control group, whereas group 3 is a positive control
group. Group 2 is the experiment group to determine the clastogenic
effect of ZOE, whereas group 4 is the experiment group to determine
the anticlastogenic effect of ZOE. The liver micronucleus was used
as the end-point marker.Values expressed
as mean ±
SD; MNH: micronucleated hepatocytes; HEP: hepatocytes; DEN; diethylnitrosamine;
(*) indicates statistical significance at p <
0.05 compared to the negative control group; (**) indicates statistical
significance at p < 0.05 compared to the positive
control group.
Discussion
Replicative senescence is a basic feature of normal somatic cells
and is widely considered as a cancer prevention mechanism.[7] However, 85–90% of cancers escape this
phenomenon by reactivating telomerase, which adds telomeric repeats
to the 3′-end of telomeres.[8] Telomerase-specific
inhibition should, therefore, not affect normal somatic cells. It
would render cancer cells entering replicative senescence naturally,
with the manifestation of telomere erosion occurring with each round
of cell division similar to that of normal somatic cells. With this
safe mode of action, telomerase-specific inhibition is an attractive
strategy for cancer chemoprevention.Dietary phytochemicals
have attracted considerable interest for
cancer prevention for some time because of their potential therapeutic
effects and safety. In search of telomerase inhibitors from plants,
a few natural phytochemicals were found to inhibit telomerase in cancer
cells; these include curcumin, EGCG, resveratrol, genistein, sulforaphane,
silibinin, and pristimerin, among others.[30] However, it is worth noting that only a few reports show the long-term
effect of these phytochemicals on telomere shortening and cellular
senescence after successive rounds of cell divisions using a nontoxic
dose. This is probably due to their broad mechanism of actions and
cytotoxicity. Among these few reports, EGCG is the only example that
was found to induce telomere shortening and cellular senescence (in
U937 leukemic cells and HT29colon adenocarcinoma cells) with its
nontoxic dose up to 55–60 population doublings.[31] Curcumin was also found to induce telomere shortening
in several brain tumor cell lines after treating these cells with
half the concentration of their IC50 for 15 days.[32] Similar to curcumin, thymoquinone (a compound
from Nigella sativa) was found to induce
telomere shortening in glioblastoma cell line M059K after treating
these cells with approximately half the concentration of their IC50 for 15 days.[33] The Inula viscosa extracts, and its purified sesquiterpene
lactone, tomentosin, were claimed to induce telomere shortening in
cervical cancer cells.[34,35] However, these two reports only
measured the length of the 3′ G-rich telomeric overhang after
the cells were treated with the test sample for 72 h.In the
present study, we add ZOE to this short
list of plant-originated telomerase inhibitors that
induce telomere shortening and cellular senescence in cancer cells
using subcytotoxic doses. We first demonstrated that ZOE could suppress hTERT expression and telomerase activity in A549lung cancer
cells. The cells treated with subcytotoxic doses of ZOE proliferated
normally but were soon found to manifest telomere shortening and cellular
senescence. Using assay-guided fractionation and GC/MS analysis, we
found several paradols and/or shogaols as the major compounds in the
active subfractions. The results from pure 6-paradol and 6-shogaol
showed that these two compounds could suppress hTERT expression and telomerase activity in the A549 cells, although 6-gingerol
could not. We have concluded that the active compounds in ZOE that
are responsible for the suppression of hTERT expression
and telomerase activity in A549lung cancer cells are paradols and
shogaols. Last, we also found that ZOE did not induce acute toxicity
in rats and showed the anticlastogenic effect against liver micronucleus
formation in rats.Nowadays, much attention has been focused
on products derived from
food sources that provide extra health benefits. Cancer chemoprevention
by dietary phytochemicals is of considerable interest because of their
potential therapeutic effects and safety. Many dietary phytochemicals
were found to possess chemopreventive properties in various epidemiological
and preclinical studies.[36] Recently, clinical
trials have added to the evidence supporting the efficacy of some
selected compounds.[37,38] Ginger (Z. officinale
Roscoe), an already established nutraceutical product,
has been reputed to have anticancer properties in various experimental
models. Experiments in A549lung cancer cells reveal that gingerol,
shogaol, and zerumbone exhibit anticancer activity through various
mechanisms.[39−43] For example, gingerol was found to sensitize humanlung cancer cells
apoptosis.[39] 6-Shogaol was found to induce
autophagy through the AKT/mTOR pathway and inhibit cancer via microsomal
prostaglandin E2 synthase 1 (mPGES-1), β-catenin, and glycogen
synthase kinase 3β (GSK-3β) pathways.[40,41] Moreover, 6-shogaol and its cysteine-conjugated metabolite induce
lung cancer cell apoptosis through a p53 pathway in both in vitro
and in vivo experiments.[42] Zerumbone was
also found to suppress cell invasion through inhibiting the FAK/AKT/ROCK
pathway.[43] Our present study shows that
paradols and shogaols in the ginger extract (ZOE) suppressed telomerase,
which led to telomere shortening and cellular senescence, with a significant
reduction in the clonogenicity of the A549lung cancer, using only
subcytotoxic doses. The extract was also found to be safe in rats,
with an additional chemoprotective effect against DEN-induced liver
micronucleus formation. These results lead us to believe that the
ginger extract could potentially be a valuable tool in dietary cancer
prevention against lung cancer.
Methods
Chemicals
We purchased all materials from commercial
suppliers. All oligonucleotides were supplied by Ward Medic (Thailand).
Sulforhodamine B, 6-gingerol, and DEN were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich.
Taq DNA polymerase was purchased from Vivantis. The collagenase type
IV was purchased from Invitrogen (USA). Standard 6-shogaol and 6-paradol
were provided by Prof. Apichart Suksamrarn (details of extraction,
purification, and identification are shown in Supporting Information, S1).
Plant Collection and Extraction
Ginger rhizome was
collected in March 2012 from Lampang Province, Thailand, and was identified
as Z. officinale Roscoe. A voucher
specimen (BKF no. 118527) was deposited in the Forest Herbarium, Ministry
of Natural Resources and Environment, Bangkok, Thailand. For the assay-guided
fractionation study, ginger rhizomes (4.0 kg) were air-dried and finely
pulverized. The ginger powder was then extracted into hexane, ethyl
acetate, acetone, and methanol sequentially. After drying the solvents,
we afforded 371.5, 235.8, 276.1, and 189.6 g of residues, respectively.
The crude ethyl acetate extract (235.8 g) was purified by column chromatography
using silica gel (Merck no. 7734, Mesh 70–230 ASTM) as the
stationary phase. The first mobile phase was a gradient mixture of
hexane (1 L) and ethyl acetate (1 L), followed by a gradient mixture
of ethyl acetate (1 L) and methanol (1 L). The eluent was collected
in a series of fractions, and the composition was visualized by TLC,
before the fractions with similar composition were collected into
four main fractions, E1–E4. After evaporation, dry powders
of E1 (85.7 g), E2 (16.5 g), E3 (23.1 g), and E4 (46.2 g) were obtained.
The E2 fraction was found to suppress hTERT mRNA
expression and telomerase activity, and 10 g of the E2 fraction was
further purified by the same chromatography. The first mobile phase
was a gradient mixture of hexane (100 mL) and ethyl acetate (100 mL),
followed by a gradient mixture of ethyl acetate (100 mL) and methanol
(100 mL). After evaporation, dry powders of E2.1 (2.2 g), E2.2 (1.7
g), E2.3 (3.1 g), and E2.4 (2.8 g) were obtained. These fractions
and subfractions were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and stored
at 4 °C. Prior to use, the stock solutions were diluted with
distilled deionized water to working solutions with the same concentration
of DMSO. The final concentration of DMSO was the same in all samples
and was between 0.16 and 0.64% in the short-term cell culture experiments.
For the long-term treatment of A549 cells, the crude ethyl acetate
fraction of Z. officinale (ZOE) was
obtained in a similar manner. The final concentration of DMSO in both
experimental set and control set was 0.05%.
TLC Analysis
ZOE
and its fractions and subfractions
were TLC fingerprinted using silica gel GF254 (Fluka) as the stationary
phase, and a mixture of hexane and ethyl acetate was used as the mobile
phase. The TLC plate was then dipped in p-anisaldehyde/sulfuric
acid reagent before color developing by heating at 100 °C.
HPLC Analysis
We performed the HPLC analyses using
an HPLC system (Agilent 1200 infinity series, Agilent, USA) and a
C18 reverse phase column (4.6 mm × 150 mm, ZORBAX Eclipse Plus)
as the stationary phase. A 50 μL sample of ZOE and its fractions
(E1–E4) (10 mg/ml) were separated using a mixture of acetonitrile
(A) and water (B) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 2.0 mL/min.
Within the total run time of 10 min, the solvent mixture profile of
the mobile phase was as follows: 0–0.5 min, 35A:65B; 0.5–5
min, gradient mixture from 35A:65B to 95A:5B; and 5–10 min,
95A:5B. The compounds were detected using a UV–visible detector
(Spec Monitor 3200) at 280 nm. A mixture of standard 6-gingerol (0.4
mg/mL), 6-shogaol (0.2 mg/mL), and 6-paradol (0.2 mg/mL) was run separately
using the same conditions.
Cell Culture
The A549human lung
carcinoma cell line
was obtained from American Type Culture Collection (Rockville, MD)
and grown in RPMI 1640 culture media with 10% fetal bovine serum and
1% antibiotics (50 μg/mL streptomycin, 50 units/mL penicillin)
at 37 °C in a humidified incubator with 5% CO2.
In Vitro Growth Inhibition Assays
We determined the
growth inhibition of A549 cells by the ginger extract and selected
ginger compounds using the sulforhodamine B (SRB) assay according
to a published protocol.[44] The A549 cells
(1.0 × 104 cells) were incubated with various concentrations
of the indicated ginger fraction or the pure compound at 37 °C
for 72 h in a humidified incubator with 5% CO2. The graphs
between the concentration of the test sample and the percentage of
cell viability, from three independent experiments, were plotted,
and the 50% growth inhibitory concentrations (IC50) were
determined. The IC50 growth inhibitory concentrations of
A549lung cancer cells by ZOE, its subfractions, and some pure compounds
are summarized in the Supporting Information (Table S3).
Semiquantitative RT-PCR Analysis
We grew A549 cells
(5.0 × 105 cells) on a six-well tissue culture plate
for 24 h at 37 °C before they were treated with the indicated
concentration of the test sample for another 24 h. The total RNA was
collected, and the mRNA was converted into cDNA using RevertAid reverse
transcriptase (Thermo Scientific). PCR amplification for each gene
was carried out with the gene-specific primers. The primer sequences,
annealing temperatures, and PCR cycles are summarized in the Supporting Information (Table S4).
Modified TRAP
Assay
We performed the TRAP assay according
to a published protocol and our previous publication.[23,45] Briefly, the A549 cells (5.0 × 105 cells) were seeded
on a six-well tissue culture plate for 24 h before the test sample
at the indicated concentration was added to the culture media. The
cells were incubated for another 48 h before they were lysed with
200 μL of CHAPS lysis buffer. The 10 μg of the crude cell
extract was then used as the telomerase source in the telomerase reaction
mixture, in which it extends a primer at 30 °C for 30 min. The
DNA amplification mixture was added, and the telomerase-extended products
were amplified by PCR. The amplified products were separated by nondenaturing
acrylamide gel electrophoresis, and results were recorded using a
phosphoimaging system (Typhoon; Molecular Dynamics). The oligonucleotides
used in this assay are summarized in the Supporting Information (Table S5).
Long-Term Proliferation
Assay
We compared three sets
of A549 cell cultures for the long-term proliferation assay: the control
group and the two experimental groups with the subcytotoxic doses
(5 and 10 μg/mL) of ZOE added in the culture media. We subcultured
A549 cells (1.5 × 105 cells) onto a 75 cm2 tissue culture flask, with or without the indicated concentration
of ZOE, in RPMI 1640 medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum.
We changed the culture media after 3 days, and on day 6, we trypsinized,
collected, and counted the cells. Then, the process was repeated up
to 60 days. The equation: n = (log Pn – log P0)/log 2,
where Pn is the number of cells after
n doublings and P0 is the initial seeding
density, was then used to calculate the number of population doublings.
The graph between the cumulative number of population doublings and
time was then plotted.
Telomere Length Assay
We performed
a telomere length
analysis using the TeloTAGGG Telomere Length Assay
kit (Roche Applied Science) according to the manufacturer’s
instruction and our published protocol.[46] The formula ∑(ODi)/∑(ODi/Li), where ODi indicates the signal
at the position i and Li is the molecular
weight marker at the same position, was used to calculate the mean
TRF length.
We performed a β-galactosidase activity
assay according to
our published protocol.[46] We first grew
the A549 cells (1 × 105 cells) collected from the
long-term proliferation study in a six-well plate for 24 h before
they were fixed with 2% formaldehyde and 0.2% glutaraldehyde solution.
After that, the cells were washed and incubated in the 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl-β-d-galactopyranoside (X-gal) solution overnight at room temperature.
Cells with β-galactosidase activity cleave X-gal and produce
a blue stain. The β-galactosidase positive cells were monitored
under a phase contrast microscope with a blue stain, usually accompanied
by cell morphological changes. In each experiment, the blue-stained
cells were counted in the field with more than 400 cells for at least
10 fields. The graph between the percentage of β-galactosidase
positive cells and time was then plotted.
Colony-Forming Assays
We performed a colony-forming
assay according to our published protocol.[46] We first seeded the A549 cells collected from the long-term proliferation
assay in a 10 cm dish at a low density (2 × 103 cells)
and allowed the colonies to form for 2 weeks, with the change of fresh
growth media every 3 days. Crystal violet was then used to stain the
colonies. The number of colonies was obtained using the ImageQuant
TL software (Nonlinear Dynamics).
Gas Chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry
GC/MS data were
collected with a GC7890 instrument from Agilent Technologies, with
a DB-5MS column (30 m × 0.25 mm ID × 0.25 μm film
thickness). The temperature programming was as follows: 50 °C,
5 min; to 200 °C at 10 °C/min; to 250 °C at 5 °C/min;
and 250 °C, 35 min, and the ionizing voltage was 70 eV, with
1 μL split injection (split ratio 25:1). The flow rate of helium
gas was 1.5 mL/min. The identification of compounds was obtained using
the Agilent Enhanced Chemstation MSD Data Analysis Tool with the W8N08
mass spectrum library (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., USA).
Animals
Wistar rats were fed with the CP082 diet (Perfect
Companion Group) and tap water ad libitum under constant conditions
of 12 h light/dark cycle and 50–60% humidity at 25 °C.
The Animal Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai
University, approved our experimental protocols.
Acute Toxicity
Test
The acute toxicity of ZOE was evaluated
according to OECD Guideline 425.[47] The
6 weeks old (190–200 g) female Wistar rats were divided into
two groups of five rats. The vehicle control group received 5 mL/kg
of 5% Tween 80, whereas the experimental group received a single dose
of 5000 mg/kg bw of ZOE by oral gavage. The body weight, behaviors,
signs of toxicity, and mortality were observed and recorded every
day for 14 days. The gross pathological observation of the tissues
and organs was performed after the rats were sacrificed at the end
of the study.
Liver Micronucleus Assay
We performed
a liver micronucleus
assay according to our published protocol.[48] The 4 weeks old (110–120 g) male Wistar rats were divided
into four groups of six rats. Group 1 was a negative control group
in which the rats were supplemented with 5% Tween 80 for 28 days,
whereas group 3 was a positive control group in which the rats were
treated in the same way as group 1 but with an injection of 30 mg/kg
bw of DEN on day 22 and day 25 to induce micronucleated hepatocytes.
Group 2 was the experimental group to determine the clastogenic effects
of ZOE, in which 500 mg/kg bw of ZOE was administered to rats by oral
gavage for 28 days. Group 4 was the experimental group to determine
the anticlastogenic effects of ZOE, in which 500 mg/kg bw of ZOE was
administered to rats by oral gavage for 28 days, and rats were injected
with 30 mg/kg bw of DEN on day 22 and day 25. On day 29, partial hepatectomy
was performed, and single hepatocytes were isolated by the two-step
collagenase perfusion method. The liver cell suspension was stained
with the 4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole solution, and the incidence
of micronucleated hepatocytes was analyzed under a fluorescent microscope
on day 33, 4 days after partial hepatectomy. The initial body weight,
final body weight, and mitotic index were also recorded.
Statistical
Analysis
For assays in cell culture, data
were taken from triplicate samples of three independent experiments.
Statistical significance between treatments and controls was analyzed
using Student’s t-test analysis. For assays
in rats, data of each variable for each group are reported as means
± SD. The significance of differences between groups was analyzed
using one-way analysis of variance with the least significant difference
for post hoc tests. Values of p < 0.05 (*) were
considered to be significant.
Authors: Shivanand D Jolad; R Clark Lantz; Aniko M Solyom; Guan Jie Chen; Robert B Bates; Barbara N Timmermann Journal: Phytochemistry Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 4.072