4.7 Article

Comparison of the Effects of Fucoidans on the Cell Viability of Tumor and Non-Tumor Cell Lines

Journal

MARINE DRUGS
Volume 17, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/md17080441

Keywords

Fucus vesiculosus; Fucus serratus; Fucus evanescens; Laminaria digitata; Saccharina latissima; Dictyosiphon foeniculaceus; heparin; cancer; cytotoxic; antiproliferative

Funding

  1. InterReg-Deutschland-Denmark
  2. Herrmann -Wacker-Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Fucoidans extracted from brown algae exert manifold biological activities paving the way for the development of numerous applications including treatments outside tumor therapy such as age-related macular degeneration or tissue engineering. In this study, we investigated the antiproliferative effects of fucoidans extracted from six different algae (Fucus vesiculosus, F. serratus, F. distichus subsp. evanescens, Dictyosiphon foeniculaceus, Laminaria digitata, Saccharina latissima) as well as three reference compounds (Sigma fucoidan, heparin, enoxaparin) on tumor (HL-60, Raji, HeLa, OMM-1, A-375, HCT-116, Hep G2) and non-tumor (ARPE-19, HaCaT) cell lines. All fucoidans were extracted according to a standardized procedure and tested in a commercially available MTS assay. Cell viability was measured after 24 h incubation with test compounds (1-100 mu g/mL). Apart from few exceptions, fucoidans and heparins did not impair cell viability. In contrast, fucoidans significantly increased cell viability of suspension cell lines, but not of adherent cells. Fucoidans slightly increased viability of tumor cells and had no impact on the viability of non-tumor cells. The cell viability of HeLa and ARPE-19 cells negatively correlated with protein content and total phenolic content (TPC) of fucoidans, respectively. In summary, none of the tested fucoidans turned out to be anti-proliferative, rendering them interesting for future studies and applications.

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