4.3 Article

Both Bupivacaine and Levobupivacaine inhibit colon cancer cell growth but not melanoma cells in vitro

期刊

JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIA
卷 33, 期 1, 页码 17-25

出版社

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s00540-018-2577-6

关键词

Bupivacaine; Levobupivacaine; Colon cancer; Melanoma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundRetrospective studies indicate that the use of regional anaesthesia causes a reduction in cancer recurrence after oncological surgery, which could be due to anaesthetic's negating effect on immunosuppression related to the surgical stress response. Local anaesthetics may also exert direct suppressive effects on malignant cells, an area where further investigation is urgently needed.MethodsHuman colon cancer cells and human melanoma cells were cultured and then treated with 1mM bupivacaine or levobupivacaine for up to 24 or 48h. Their migratory ability was measured by scratch assay, proliferation determined with Ki67 immunofluorescence staining, and apoptosis accessed with annexin V and PI staining on flow cytometry. The effects of bupivacaine and levobupivacaine on cellular signaling and molecular response, specifically, on endoplasmic reticulum stress (ERS), were studied with immunostaining and western blot.ResultsIn colon cancer cells, treatment with bupivacaine and levobupivacaine significantly inhibited cell migration (**p<0.01, ***p<0.001; n=4) and proliferation (**p<0.01; n=4), while increasing the expression of CHOP (***p<0.001; n=4) and decreased the expression of Grp78 (*p<0.05; n=4). These effects were not mirrored by melanoma cells, such that no significant increase in apoptosis was seen in either melanoma cell lines following treatment.ConclusionThese in vitro data suggested that both bupivacaine and levobupivacaine suppress colorectal adenocarcinoma cell proliferation and migration, which are concurrent with increased endoplasmic reticulum stress. Conversely, melanoma cells are more resilient to these two commonly used local anaesthetics. Further in vivo studies or clinical trials are needed.

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

4.3
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