4.6 Article

Phenolic extract from oleaster (Olea europaea var. Sylvestris) leaves reduces colon cancer growth and induces caspase-dependent apoptosis in colon cancer cells via the mitochondrial apoptotic pathway

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 12, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0170823

关键词

-

资金

  1. Inserm, Labex LipSTIC INSERM

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dietary polyphenols, derived from natural products, have received a great interest for their chemopreventive properties against cancer. In this study, we investigated the effects of phenolic extract of the oleaster leaves ( PEOL) on tumor growth in mouse model and on cell death in colon cancer cell lines. We assessed the effect of oleaster leaf infusion on HCT116 ( human colon cancer cell line) xenograft growth in athymic nude mice. We observed that oleaster leaf polyphenol-rich infusion limited HCT116 tumor growth in vivo. Investigations of PEOL on two human CRC cell lines showed that PEOL induced apoptosis in HCT116 and HCT8 cells. We demonstrated an activation of caspase-3, -7 and -9 by PEOL and that pretreatment with the pan-caspase inhibitor, N-benzyloxycarbonyl-Val-Ala-Asp-fluoromethylketone ( z-VAD-fmk), prevented PEOL-induced cell death. We observed an involvement of the mitochondrial pathway in PEOL-induced apoptosis evidenced by reactive oxygen species ( ROS) production, a decrease of mitochondrial membrane potential, and cytochrome c release. Increase in intracellular Ca2+ concentration induced by PEOL represents the early event involved in mitochondrial dysfunction, ROS-induced endoplasmic reticulum ( ER) stress and apoptosis induced by PEOL, as ruthenium red, an inhibitor of mitochondrial calcium uptake inhibited apoptotic effect of PEOL, BAPTA/AM inhibited PEOL-induced ROS generation and finally, N-acetyl-L-cysteine reversed ER stress and apoptotic effect of PEOL. These results demonstrate that polyphenols from oleaster leaves might have a strong potential as chemopreventive agent in colorectal cancer.

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

4.6
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