4.7 Article

Melatonin and celecoxib improve the outcomes in hamsters with experimental pancreatic cancer

期刊

JOURNAL OF PINEAL RESEARCH
卷 49, 期 3, 页码 264-270

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-079X.2010.00791.x

关键词

celecoxib; melatonin; oxidative stress; pancreatic cancer

资金

  1. Instituto de Salud Carlos III

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pancreatic cancer is a major health problem because of the aggressiveness of the disease and the lack of effective systemic therapies. Melatonin (MEL) has antioxidant activity and prevents experimental genotoxicity. The specific inhibitor of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2), celecoxib (CEL), increases the efficacy of chemoradiotherapy in advanced pancreatic cancer. The objective of the study was the comparison and synergic effect of MEL and CEL during either the induction or progression phases of the tumor process, measuring parameters of oxidative stress, number of tumor nodules and survival of animals with pancreatic cancer. Pancreatic cancer was induced by N-nitrosobis (2-oxopropyl)amine) (BOP) in Syrian hamsters. Melatonin and/or CEL were administered during the induction, postinduction as well as during both phases. The presence of tumor nodules were observed macroscopically in pancreatic and splenic areas, and the levels of lipoperoxides (LPO), reduced glutathione (GSH), superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT) and glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px) in pancreatic tissue were measured. The increases in tumor nodules and LPO as well as the reductions in GSH and enzymatic antioxidants in the pancreas induced by BOP were related to a lower survival rate of animals. The administration of MEL exerted a more potent beneficial effect than CEL treatment on the reduction in tumor nodules, oxidative stress and death of experimental BOP-treated animals. The combined treatment only exerted a synergistic beneficial effect when administered during the induction phase. Melatonin by itself had significant beneficial actions in improving the survival of hamsters.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据