4.7 Article

New Trends for Antimalarial Drugs: Synergism between Antineoplastics and Antimalarials on Breast Cancer Cells

期刊

BIOMOLECULES
卷 10, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biom10121623

关键词

breast cancer; drug synergism; antineoplastic drugs; drug repurposing; antimalarial drugs; combination therapy

资金

  1. FEDER-Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional funds through the COMPETE 2020-Operational Programme for Competitiveness and Internationalisation (POCI), Portugal 2020
  2. Portuguese funds through Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia (FCT) [IF/00092/2014/CP1255/CT0004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chemotherapy plays a key role in breast cancer therapy, but drug resistance and unwanted side effects make the treatment less effective. We propose a new combination model that combines antineoplastic drugs and antimalarials for breast cancer therapy. Cytotoxic effects of two antineoplastic agents alone and in combination with several antimalarials on MCF-7 tumor cell line was evaluated. Different concentrations in a fixed ratio were added to the cultured cells and incubated for 48 h. Cell viability was evaluated using MTT and SRB assays. Synergism was evaluated using the Chou-Talalay method. The results indicate doxorubicin (DOX) and paclitaxel (PTX) alone at concentrations of their IC50 and higher are cell growth inhibitors. Mefloquine, artesunate, and chloroquine at concentrations of their IC50 demonstrate anti-cancer activity. In combination, almost all antimalarials demonstrate higher ability than DOX and PTX alone to decrease cell viability at concentrations of IC50 and lower than their IC50. The combination of chloroquine, artesunate and mefloquine with DOX and PTX was synergic (CI < 1). The combination of DOX and mefloquine after 48 h incubation demonstrated the highest cytotoxicity against MCF-7 cells, and the combination of DOX and artesunate was the most synergic. These results suggest antimalarials could act synergistically with DOX/PTX for breast cancer therapy.

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