4.7 Article

Antiangiogenic effect of licochalcone A

期刊

BIOCHEMICAL PHARMACOLOGY
卷 80, 期 8, 页码 1152-1159

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.bcp.2010.07.006

关键词

Angiogenesis; Licochalcone A; Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor; Human umbilical vascular endothelial cells

资金

  1. Korea government (MEST) [2007-0055085]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2007-0055085] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To date, no antiangiogenic activity has been demonstrated for licochalcone A (LicA), a major phenolic constituent of Glycyrrhiza inflata, although it shows significant antitumor activity in human malignant cell lines. Our previous work demonstrated that LicA down-regulates inflammatory responses to lipopolysaccharide in murine macrophages. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate whether LicA inhibits angiogenesis, which is crucial for cancer development and progression. LicA significantly inhibited proliferation (20 mu M), migration (5-20 mu M), and tube formation (10-20 mu M) of human umbilical vascular endothelial cells (HUVECs) as well as microvessel growth from rat aortic rings (10-20 mu M). Furthermore, LicA significantly inhibited the growth of CT-26 colon cancer implants in BALB/c mice, with fewer CD31- and Ki-67-positive cells but more apoptotic cells. The underlying antiangiogenic mechanism of LicA correlated with down-regulation of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-2 activation. Our findings provide the first evidence that LicA inhibits angiogenesis in vitro and in vivo, perhaps by blocking VEGF/VEGFR-2 signaling. Inhibition of tumor growth may be attributed, at least in part, to decreased angiogenesis in LicA-treated mice. These findings emphasize the potential use of LicA against tumor development and progression in which angiogenesis is stimulated. (C) 2010 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