4.7 Article

Comparisons of the anti-tumor activity of polysaccharides from fermented mycelia and cultivated fruiting bodies of Cordyceps militaris in vitro

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL MACROMOLECULES
Volume 130, Issue -, Pages 307-314

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.02.155

Keywords

Cordyceps militaris; Polysaccharide; Anti-tumor activity

Funding

  1. Key scientific research fund of Xihua University [Z17127]
  2. Open Research Subject of Key Laboratory (Research Base) of Food Bio-technology [szjj2017-107]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31871791]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A comparison of the anti-tumor activity of CMPS-II and CBPS-II polysaccharides, respectively is obtained from the fermented mycelium and cultivated fruiting bodies of Cordyceps militaris. This in vitro anti-tumor activity is investigated using an MU assay, immunofluorescence staining, a Western Blot assay, a qRT-PCR assay, and Annexin V-FITC/PI double staining. The experimental results indicate that the inhibition rate of CMPS-11 on H1299 tumor cells is higher than that of CBPS-II. With a concentration of 500 g/mL, the inhibition rate of CMPS-I1 and CBPS-I1 were 54.55% and 34.80%, respectively. Both CMPS-H and CBPS-II can increase the protein and mRNA expression level of cell apoptosis factors Caspase-3, Caspase-9, and p53, while reducing the protein and mRNA expression levels of proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA), to induce tumor cells apoptosis. The induction effect of CMPS-II was stronger than CBPS-II. These results suggest that CMPS-II is superior to CBPS-1I regarding the inhibition of H1299 lung cancer cells. Furthermore, CMPS-II is a potentially useful substitution for CBPS-I1 in the treatment of lung cancer and provides new insights into the mechanism of its anti-tumor activity. (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available