4.3 Article

Preparation of Ethanol Extract of Propolis Loaded Niosome Formulation and Evaluation of Effects on Different Cancer Cell Lines

Journal

NUTRITION AND CANCER-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
Volume 74, Issue 1, Pages 265-277

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/01635581.2021.1876889

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Ege University Aliye Uster Foundation
  2. Research Fund of Kocaeli University [KOU/BAP/2018/118]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that niosome formulations containing propolis showed higher activity than ethanol extract of propolis in cancer cells, with faster decrease in cancer cell viability, indicating a potential anti-cancer activity.
Propolis is a candidate for cancer treatment with its activity against different tumor cells and, has a wide spectrum of biological and pharmacological activities due to the diversity of its components. In this study, antitumorigenic activities of ethanol extract of propolis (EEP) and ethanol extract of propolis loaded niosome (PLN) were compared using 2D and 3D cell culture. Niosome formulations were prepared by thin film hydration technique. Cell viability of EEP and PLN was analyzed on MCF7, A549, MDA-MB-231, SK-MEL, SK-BR-3, DU145 and L-929 cell lines using MTT assay. L929, MCF7 and A549 cells were cultured using the 3D petri dish technique and their spherical forms were obtained after 142 h. After 24 h, PLN and EEP application, cell viability analysis was performed on 3D cultures with WST assay. As a result, niosome formulations containing EEP showed higher activity than ethanol extract of propolis in cancer cells. While a slow decrease was observed in cell viability in EEP treated cancer cells, it was observed that the percentage viability rates decreased in a shorter time in PLN treated cancer cells. Also, PLN can be used as an anticancer activity drug such as Doxorubicin, but this is not the case for EEP.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available