4.7 Article

Novel Broccoli Sulforaphane-Based Analogues Inhibit the Progression of Pancreatic Cancer without Side Effects

期刊

BIOMOLECULES
卷 10, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biom10050769

关键词

bioactive agents; drug development; microRNA signaling; pancreatic cancer; NCI-60; sulforaphane; sulfoximine

资金

  1. German Cancer Aid (Deutsche Krebshilfe) [111299]
  2. German Research Council [DFG HE 3186/15-1]
  3. Heidelberger Stiftung Chirurgie
  4. Dietmar Hopp-Stiftung
  5. Klaus Tschira Stiftung
  6. Hanns A. Pielenz-Stiftung

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The naturally occurring isothiocyanate sulforaphane, found in Brassicaceae vegetables, is promising in cancer treatment, e.g., by the normalization of enhanced levels of NF-kappa B-signaling in tumor stem cells. We chemically synthesized seven sulforaphane analogues by substitution of the sulfinyl group (S(O)) to either sulfimidoyl (S(NR)) or sulfonimidoyl (S (O) (NR)) groups, and characterized them in the cell lines of pancreatic cancer and several other tumor entities, including the NCI-60 cell panel. MTT and colony forming assays, flow cytometry, immunohistochemistry, microRNA arrays, bioinformatics, tumor xenotransplantation, and Kaplan Meier survival curves were performed. Compared to sulforaphane, the analogue SF102 was most efficient in inhibition of viability, colony formation, tumor growth, and the induction of apoptosis, followed by SF134. Side effects were not observed, as concluded from the body weight and liver histology of chick embryos and survival of C. elegans nematodes. Among 6659 differentially regulated microRNAs, miR29b-1-5p, and miR-27b-5p were downregulated by sulforaphane compared to controls, but upregulated by SF102 and SF134 compared to sulforaphane, suggesting differential signaling. Each substance was involved in the regulation of several NF-kappa B-related target genes. In conclusion, sulforaphane analogues are promising for the development of highly active new drugs in cancer treatment.

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