4.6 Review

Molecular Targets of Dietary Phenethyl Isothiocyanate and Sulforaphane for Cancer Chemoprevention

Journal

AAPS JOURNAL
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages 87-97

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1208/s12248-009-9162-8

Keywords

dietary cancer chemoprevention; NF-kB; Nrf2; phenethyl isothiocyanate; sulforaphane

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [R01-CA073674, R01-CA094828, R01-CA118947]
  2. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [R01CA094828, R01CA073674, R01CA118947] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES [P30ES005022] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Development of cancer is a long-term and multistep process which comprises initiation, progression, and promotion stages of carcinogenesis. Conceivably, it can be targeted and interrupted along these different stages. In this context, many naturally occurring dietary compounds from our daily consumption of fruits and vegetables have been shown to possess cancer preventive effects. Phenethyl isothiocyanate (PEITC) and sulforaphane (SFN) are two of the most widely investigated isothiocyanates from the crucifers. Both have been found to be very potent chemopreventive agents in numerous animal carcinogenesis models as well as cell culture models. They exert their chemopreventive effects through regulation of diverse molecular mechanisms. In this review, we will discuss the molecular targets of PEITC and SFN potentially involved in cancer chemoprevention. These include the regulation of drug-metabolizing enzymes phase I cytochrome P450s and phase II metabolizing enzymes. In addition, the signaling pathways including Nrf2-Keap 1, anti-inflammatory NF kappa B, apoptosis, and cell cycle arrest as well as some receptors will also be discussed. Furthermore, we will also discuss the similarities and their potential differences in the regulation of these molecular targets by PEITC and SFN.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available