Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22895066›Full record

ArticleCancer biology & therapy2012

Antagonism between curcumin and the topoisomerase II inhibitor etoposide: a study of DNA damage, cell cycle regulation and death pathways.

Ekram M Saleh, Raafat A El-awady, Nadia A Eissa, Wael M Abdel-Rahman

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer biology & therapy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. New Insights into Dose-Dependent Effects of Curcumin on ARPE-19 Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Is Curcumin the Answer to Future Chemotherapy Cocktail?Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  5. Natural Polyphenols as Modulators of Etoposide Anti-Cancer Activity.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Protective effect of curcumin on chemotherapy-induced intestinal dysfunction.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2013
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 6 countries.

Ekram M SalehClinical Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Unit, Cancer Biology Department, National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt. ekramsaleh@hotmail.com
Raafat A El-awady
Nadia A Eissa
Wael M Abdel-Rahman
University of Sharjah · AECairo University · EGElectron (Ukraine) · UA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledThe use of combinations of chemotherapy and natural products has recently emerged as a new method of cancer therapy, relying on the capacity of certain natural compounds to trigger cell death with low doses of chemotherapeutic agents and few side effects. The current study aims to evaluate the modulatory effects of curcumin (CUR), Nigella sativa (NS) and taurine on etoposide (ETP) cytotoxicity in a panel of cancer cell lines and to identify their underlying mechanisms. CUR alone showed potent antitumor activity, but surprisingly, its interaction with ETP was antagonistic in four out of five cancer cell lines. Neither taurine nor Nigella sativa affect the sensitivity of cancer cells to ETP. Examination of the DNA damage response machinery (DDR) showed that both ETP and CUR elicited DNA double-strand breaks (DSB) and evoked γ-H2AX foci formation at doses as low as 1 µg/ml. Cell cycle analysis revealed S phase arrest after ETP or CUR application, whereas co-treatment with ETP and CUR led to increased arrest of the cell cycle in S phase (MCF-7 cells) or the accumulation of cells in G 2/M phases (HCT116, and HeLa cells). Furthermore, cotreatment with ETP and CUR resulted in modulation of the level of DNA damage induction and repair compared with either agent alone. Electron microscopic examination demonstrated that different modalities of cell death occurred with each treatment. CUR alone induced autophagy, apoptosis and necrosis, whereas ETP alone or in combination with CUR led to apoptosis and necrosis.

conclusionsCotreatment with ETP and CUR resulted in an antagonistic interaction. This antagonism is related, in part, to the enhanced arrest of tumor cells in both S and G 2/M phases, which prevents the cells from entering M-phase with damaged DNA and, consequently, prevents cell death from occurring. This arrest allows time for the cells to repair DNA damage so that cell cycle -arrested cells can eventually resume cell cycle progression and continue their physiological program.

Indexed as

DNA DamageAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCell CycleCell DeathCell Line, TumorCurcuminDrug InteractionsEtoposideHCT116 CellsHeLa CellsHep G2 CellsHumansMCF-7 CellsTaurineTopoisomerase II InhibitorsAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicCurcuminEtoposideTaurineTopoisomerase II Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID22895066
PMCPMC3461813
OpenAlexW2011366717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.