4.1 Article

Natural deep eutectic solvents: cytotoxic profile

Journal

SPRINGERPLUS
Volume 5, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER INT PUBL AG
DOI: 10.1186/s40064-016-2575-9

Keywords

Natural deep eutectic solvents; Green solvents; Ionic liquids; Choline chloride; Cytotoxicity; Cancer cell line; COSMO-RS

Funding

  1. University of Malaya HIR-MOHE [D000003-16001]
  2. UMRG [RP037B-15AET]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this study was to investigate the cytotoxic profiles of different ternary natural deep eutectic solvents (NADESs) containing water. For this purpose, five different NADESs were prepared using choline chloride as a salt, alongside five hydrogen bond donors (HBD) namely glucose, fructose, sucrose, glycerol, and malonic acid. Water was added as a tertiary component during the eutectics preparation, except for the malonic acid-based mixture. Coincidentally, the latter was found to be more toxic than any of the water-based NADESs. A trend was observed between the cellular requirements of cancer cells, the viscosity of the NADESs, and their cytotoxicity. This study also highlights the first time application of the conductor-like screening model for real solvent (COSMO-RS) software for the analysis of the cytotoxic mechanism of NADESs. COSMO-RS simulation of the interactions between NADESs and cellular membranes' phospholipids suggested that NADESs strongly interacted with cell surfaces and that their accumulation and aggregation possibly defined their cytotoxicity. This reinforced the idea that careful selection of NADESs components is necessary, as it becomes evident that organic acids as HBD highly contribute to the increasing toxicity of these neoteric mixtures. Nevertheless, NADESs in general seem to possess relatively less acute toxicity profiles than their DESs parents. This opens the door for future large scale utilization of these mixtures.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available