4.7 Article

Phenolic rich extracts from cowpea sprouts decrease cell proliferation and enhance 5-fluorouracil effect in human colorectal cancer cell lines

期刊

JOURNAL OF FUNCTIONAL FOODS
卷 60, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jff.2019.103452

关键词

Cowpea; Sprouts; Colorectal cancer; 5-fluorouracil

资金

  1. FCT-Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology [SFRH/BD/52544/2014, PD/00122/2012]
  2. European Investment Funds by FEDER/COMPETE/POCI-Operational Competitiveness and Internationalization Program [POCI-01-0145-FEDER-006958]
  3. National Funds by TFCT - Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology [UID/AGR/04033/2013]
  4. Project ID Interact - Integrative Research in Environment, Agro-Chain and Technology on the investigation line entitled: Innovation for Sustainable Agro-food Chains - ISAC - European Regional Development Fund (FEDER) through NORTE 2020 (Programa Operacion [NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000017]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It is known that diets high in legumes can help in the prevention and/or reduction of colorectal cancer. These effects may result, in part, from their high phenolic content. The aims of this study were to characterize the effect of sprouting on phenolic content and antioxidant activity, and test the anti-colorectal cancer effects including possible potentiation of 5-fluorouracil efficacy. Sprouting increased 1.7-fold the total phenolic content and 2.8-fold the antioxidant activity relative to raw extracts. The extract from sprouts produced a significant decrease in cell viability particularly in HCT116 and HCT15. The sprout extracts also induced significant cell death in all cell lines. The combination of extracts of cowpea sprouts with 5-fluorouracil increased sensitivity to the drug in the most resistant cells. Overall, spouting increased the anti-colorectal cancer activity of cowpea and potentiated 5-fluorouracil efficacy which warrants further research on the potential of cowpea sprouts as anti-colorectal cancer functional foods.

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