Growth inhibitory effects of Phyllanthus niruri extracts in combination with cisplatin on cancer cell lines

• Autor(a) principal: Araújo, Aurigena Antunes de
• Data de Publicação: 2012
• Outros Autores: Araújo Júnior, Raimundo Fernandes de, Soares, Luiz Alberto Lira, Porto, Cínthia Raquel da Costa, Aquino, Ranniere Gurgel Furtado de, Guedes, Hugo Gonçalo, Petrovick, Pedro Ros, Souza, Tatiane Pereira de, Guerra, Gerlane Coelho Bernardo
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UFRN
• Texto Completo: https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/25413; http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v18.i31.4162
• topic: Cisplatin; Colorectal cancer; Liver cancer; Phyllanthus niruri; Cytotoxic effect

AIM: To investigate the cytotoxic effects of spray-dried extracts of Phyllanthus niruri in combination with cisplatin on two cancer cell lines. METHODS: Colorectal carcinoma (HT29) and human hepatocellular carcinoma (HepG2) cells were treated with spray-dried extracts of Phyllanthus niruri (SDEPN) either alone or in combination with cisplatin at different concentrations (0.5 mg/mL and 1 mg/mL) for 4 h and 24 h. To verify and quantify cancer cells treated with these products as well as identify the cell cycle stage and cell viability, we stained the cells with propidium iodide and assessed them by flow cytometry. The percentage of cells in different cell cycle phases was quantified and data were expressed as histograms. Significant differences between groups were determined using analysis of variance and Bonferroni’s test, as indicated. A value of P < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. RESULTS: SDEPN had significantly different cytotoxic effects on HT29 (2.81 ± 0.11 vs 3.51 ± 1.13, P > 0.05) and HepG2 (5.07 ± 0.3 vs 15.9 ± 1.04, P < 0.001) cells when compared to control cells for 4 h. SDEPN also had significantly different cytotoxic effects on HT29 (1.91 ± 0.57 vs 4.53 ± 1.22, P > 0.05) and HepG2 (14.56 ± 1.6 vs 35.67 ± 3.94, P < 0.001) cells when compared to control cells for 24 h. Both cell lines were killed by cisplatin in a dose-dependent manner compared to control cells (HepG2 cells for 4 h: 10.78 ± 1.58 vs 53.89 ± 1.53, P < 0.001; 24 h: 8.9 ± 1.43 vs 62.78 ± 1.87, P < 0.001 and HT29 cells for 4 h: 9.52 ± 0.913 vs 49.86 ± 2.89, P < 0.001; 24 h: 11.78 ± 1.05 vs 53.34 ± 2.65, P < 0.001). In HT29 cells, pretreatment with SDEPN and subsequent treatment with cisplatin resulted in a greater number of cells being killed (12.78 ± 1.01 vs 93.76 ± 1.6, P < 0.001). HepG2 cells showed significant cell killing with treatment with SDEPN when combined with cisplatin (12.87 ± 2.78 vs 78.8 ± 3.02, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: SDEPN is selectively toxic against two cancer cell lines. Moreover, SDEPN in combination with cisplatin induces a synergistic increase in the cell death of both HT29 and HepG2 cells.