|
|
| |
Potential Anticancer Natural Product Against Human Lung Cancer Cells |
|
Faten A. Khorshid |
Abstract:
PM 701 has potential anticancer activity and it caused selective programmed cell death in lung cancer cells (A549) as described previously, this further study is aimed to present the cytotoxic effect of the lyophilized PM 701,and its fraction. Lyophilized PM 701 appears to have cytotoxic activity due to its in vitro inhibition of the proliferation of lung cancer cells. The bio-guided extraction of PM 701 gives fraction PMF (150 mg g-1 of lyophilized PM 701). PMF was able to inhibit significantly the proliferation of A549 cells without affecting the normal, HFS cells. Chromatographic fractionation of PMF produced seven compounds, where the subfraction PMEK (108.7 mg g-1 of PMF) was the most effective one with high anti-proliferative activity against A549 cells. However, the subfraction PMFK is under extensive work in order to isolate the pure bio-active compound (s) in nano-scale levels as a novel pharmaceutical composition.
|
|
|
PDF
Fulltext
XML
References
Citation
Report Citation
|
|
|
|
| RELATED ARTICLES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How to cite this article:
Faten A. Khorshid , 2009. Potential Anticancer Natural Product Against Human Lung Cancer Cells. Trends in Medical Research, 4: 8-15.
DOI: 10.3923/tmr.2009.8.15
URL: https://scialert.net/abstract/?doi=tmr.2009.8.15
|
|
|
| COMMENTS |
02 February, 2011
Shamsul Muhamad:
1.The source of PM701 is not state clearly. Does the the test substance originated from plant or from other sources.
2. The graphs are not complete, did not have standard error bar. The results indicated that the author did not repeated the experiment.
3. Please show cleary the concentration of the sample in cytotoxic assay. Eg. 2 ug/ml or in mg/ml.... |
|
26 February, 2011
Yasemin G Isgor:
I do not agree with Shamsul Muhamad. There may be someother points tp criticisae but the data presentation does not seem with any mistakes. The results given in table 2 to table 4 clearly shows the experiments performed for each dose was repeated three times. The graphical presentation, indeed, not shown with error bars as seen with figures 1,3,4,6,7,9. this may be due to several reasons: it could be due to authors either forgot to add error bars on graph, or forgot to activate such option of sofware used to plot the graphs, or the worse, the author(s) chose the results of one of the representative experiments. On the other hand, if the error bars are too small, they may not be visible in graphs unless the graphs enlarged to a half page for letter size or sometime to full page size. |
|
|
|
|
| COMMENT ON THIS PAPER |
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
Navigation |
| |
|
|
| |
|
Indexed In |
| |
|
|
Subscribe Today 
