Dataset Information

Cytotoxic, Genotoxic and Senolytic Potential of Native and Micellar Curcumin.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Curcumin, a natural polyphenol and the principal bioactive compound in Curcuma longa, was reported to have anti-inflammatory, anti-cancer, anti-diabetic and anti-rheumatic activity. Curcumin is not only considered for preventive, but also for therapeutic, purposes in cancer therapy, which requires a killing effect on cancer cells. A drawback, however, is the low bioavailability of curcumin due to its insolubility in water. To circumvent this limitation, curcumin was administered in different water-soluble formulations, including liposomes or embedded into nanoscaled micelles. The high uptake rate of micellar curcumin makes it attractive also for cancer therapeutic strategies. Native curcumin solubilised in organic solvent was previously shown to be cytotoxic and bears a genotoxic potential. Corresponding studies with micellar curcumin are lacking.

Methods

We compared the cytotoxic and genotoxic activity of native curcumin solubilised in ethanol (Cur-E) with curcumin embedded in micells (Cur-M). We measured cell death by MTT assays, apoptosis, necrosis by flow cytometry, senolysis by MTT and C12FDG and genotoxicity by FPG-alkaline and neutral singe-cell gel electrophoresis (comet assay).

Results

Using a variety of primary and established cell lines, we show that Cur-E and Cur-M reduce the viability in all cell types in the same dose range. Cur-E and Cur-M induced dose-dependently apoptosis, but did not exhibit senolytic activity. In the cytotoxic dose range, Cur-E and Cur-M were positive in the alkaline and the neutral comet assay. Genotoxic effects vanished upon removal of curcumin, indicating efficient and complete repair of DNA damage. For inducing cell death, which was measured 48 h after the onset of treatment, permanent exposure was required while 60 min pulse-treatment was ineffective. In all assays, Cur-E and Cur-M were equally active, and the concentration above which significant cytotoxic and genotoxic effects were observed was 10 µM. Micelles not containing curcumin were completely inactive.

Conclusions

The data show that micellar curcumin has the same cytotoxicity and genotoxicity profile as native curcumin. The effective concentration on different cell lines, including primary cells, was far above the curcumin concentration that can be achieved systemically in vivo, which leads us to conclude that native curcumin and curcumin administered as food supplement in a micellar formulation at the ADI level are not cytotoxic/genotoxic, indicating a wide margin of safety.

SUBMITTER: Beltzig L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8308652 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Methadone is an analgesic drug used for pain treatment and heroin substitution. Recently, methadone has been proposed to be useful also for cancer therapy, including glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), the most severe form of brain cancer, because experiments on cultured glioma cells treated with doxorubicin showed promising results. Doxorubicin, however, is not used first-line in GBM therapy. Therefore, we analyzed the cytotoxic effect of methadone alone and in combination with temozolomide, a DNA-alkylating drug that is first-line used in GBM treatment, utilizing GBM-derived cell lines and a human fibroblast cell line. We show that methadone is cytotoxic on its own, inducing apoptosis and necrosis, which was observed at a concentration above 20 µg/mL. Methadone was similar toxic in isogenic MGMT expressing and non-expressing cells, and in LN229 glioblastoma and VH10T human fibroblasts. The apoptosis-inducing activity of methadone is not bound on the opioid receptor (OR), since naloxone, a competitive inhibitor of OR, did not attenuate methadone-induced apoptosis/necrosis. Administrating methadone and temozolomide together, temozolomide had no impact on methadone-induced apoptosis (which occurred 3 days after treatment), while temozolomide-induced apoptosis (which occurred 5 days after treatment) was unaffected at low (non-toxic) methadone concentration (5 µg/mL), and at high (toxic) methadone concentration (20 µg/mL) the cytotoxic effects of methadone and temozolomide were additive. Methadone is not genotoxic, as revealed by comet and ?H2AX assay, and did not ameliorate the genotoxic effect of temozolomide. Further, methadone did not induce cellular senescence and had no effect on temozolomide-induced senescence. Although methadone was toxic on senescent cells, it cannot be considered a senolytic drug since cytotoxicity was not specific for senescent cells. Finally, we show that methadone had no impact on the MGMT promoter methylation. Overall, the data show that methadone on glioblastoma cells in vitro is cytotoxic and induces apoptosis/necrosis at doses that are above the level that can be achieved in vivo. It is not genotoxic, and does not ameliorate the cell killing or the senescence-inducing effect of temozolomide (no synergistic effect), indicating it has no impact on temozolomide-induced signaling pathways. The data do not support the notion that concomitant methadone treatment supports temozolomide-based chemotherapy.