4.1 Article

Evaluation of the antigenotoxic potential of monomeric and dimeric flavanols, and black tea polyphenols against heterocyclic amine-induced DNA damage in human lymphocytes using the Comet assay

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S1383-5718(01)00347-3

Keywords

tea; flavanols; theaflavins; theafulvins; thearubigins; antimutagenicity; Comet assay

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The polyphenolic dimers, epicatechin-4beta-8-catechin (B1), epicatechin-4p-8-epicatechin (B2), catechin-4beta-8-catechin (133), catechin-4beta-8-epicatechin (B4), and the gallate ester epicatechin-4p-8-epicatechin gallate (B'2G) were isolated from grape seeds, and theaflavins and theafulvins from black tea brews. The ability of these naturally-occurring polyphenols to afford protection against the genotoxicity of the heterocyclic amine 3-amino-1-methyl-5H-pyrido[4,3-b]indole (Trp-P-2) was compared with that of the monomeric tea flavanols, (+)-catechin (C), (-)-epicatechin (EC), (-)-epicatechin gallate (ECG), (-)-epigallocatechin (EGC) and (-)-epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG). Gencitoxic activity was evaluated in human peripheral lymphocytes using the Comet assay. At the concentration range of 1-100 muM, neither the monomeric nor the dimeric flavanols prevented the lymphocyte DNA damage induced by Trp-P-2. In contrast, both of the black tea polyphenols, theafulvins and theaflavins, at a dose range of 0.1-0.5 mg/ml, prevented, in a concentration-dependent manner, the DNA damage elicited by Trp-P-2. Finally, neither the monomeric and dimeric polyphenols (100 muM) nor the theafulvins and theaflavins (0.5 mg/ml) caused any DNA damage in the human lymphocytes. These studies illustrate that black tea theafulvins and theaflavins. if absorbed intact, may contribute to the anticarcinogenic potential associated with black tea intake. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science 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

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available