4.7 Article

Cyanidin attenuates PGE2 production and cyclooxygenase-2 expression in LNCaP human prostate cancer cells

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUTRITIONAL BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 17, 期 9, 页码 589-596

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jnutbio.2005.10.007

关键词

LNCaP prostate cancer cells; cyanidin; kaempferol; COX-2; PUFA; PGE(2)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the United States, the primary cancer in elderly men is prostate cancer (33% of newly diagnosed malignancies), but the prevalence is 75% lower in some Mediterranean countries. A possible explanation for the large difference in prostate cancer cases is that in Mediterranean countries the diet includes fish, olive oil and high amounts of nuts, fruits, vegetables, along with a regular intake of wine with meals several times per week. The LNCaP prostate cancer cells represent the nonaggressive androgen-dependent cell model that expresses moderate levels of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2). Epidemiological evidence indicates that polyphenolic compounds in diets are protective against cancer, and cyanidin and kaempferol are abundant in wine and plants. Therefore, the objective of the investigation was to determine the effects of cyanidin and kaempferol on prostaglandin E-2 (PGE(2)) and COX-2 protein levels, and if peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-gamma) and nuclear factor kappa B (NF kappa B) are involved in the expression of COX-2 in prostate cancer cells. Cyanidin and kaempferol at 1 mu M reduced the level of PGE2 in LNCaP cell cultures and also attenuated the effect of arachidonic acid on increasing the amount of PGE2. Cyanidin reduced the levels of COX-2 protein in a dose- and time-dependent fashion. PPAR'y mRNA levels were lower in cells treated after 24 h with kaempferol (0.1 and 1 gM) and cyanidin (I gM). The reduction of COX-2 mRNA by kaempferol and cyanidin may be mediated through the actions of NF kappa B and PPAR gamma as nuclear factors that bind to the COX-2 gene promoter. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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