Open Access


Read more
image01

Online Manuscript Submission


Read more
image01

Submitted Manuscript Trail


Read more
image01

Online Payment


Read more
image01

Online Subscription


Read more
image01

Email Alert



Read more
image01

Original Research Article | OPEN ACCESS

Cytotoxicity of Gemcitabine-Loaded-Microemulsions in Breast and Colon Cancer Cells

Mayson H Alkhatib , Norah S Alkhayyal

Department of Biochemistry, College of Science, King Abdulaziz University, PO Box 42801, Jeddah 21551, Saudi Arabia;

For correspondence:-  Mayson Alkhatib   Email: mhalkhatib@kau.edu.sa   Tel:+966599240526

Received: 1 February 2013        Accepted: 8 January 2014        Published: 20 February 2014

Citation: Alkhatib MH, Alkhayyal NS. Cytotoxicity of Gemcitabine-Loaded-Microemulsions in Breast and Colon Cancer Cells. Trop J Pharm Res 2014; 13(2):217-224 doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v13i2.8

© 2014 The authors.
This is an Open Access article that uses a funding model which does not charge readers or their institutions for access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) and the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read), which permit unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited..

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the antitumor activity of gemcitabine (GEM), incorporated in microemulsions with varying surfactant-to-oil (S/O) ratio, against MCF-7 breast cancer cells and HCT 116 colon cancer cells.
Methods: The microemulsion formulations consisted of Tween 80, Span 20, isopropyl myristate (IPM) and aqueous ethanol (40 %). Anticancer assessment involved determination of hemolysis activity, screening for cytotoxicity using sulphorhodamine B assay and determination of the mechanism of cell death using light microscope and ApopNexin FITC apoptosis detection kit.
Results: Hemolysis activity of all the microemulsion formulations, either blank or drug-loaded, was significantly less than that of GEM solution.  On average, MCF-7 cell viability significantly (p < 0.05) decreased from 38.53 ± 6.04 to 30.1 ± 4.66 % when the administered microemulsion concentration in modified eagle medium (MEM),  increased from 0.03 to 0.3 % v/v but significantly (p < 0.05) increased by 1.4-fold when exposed to GEM solution at equivalent concentrations. In contrast, the cytotoxicity of the microemulsion formulation against HCT116 cells was similar to that of 0.03 % v/v GEM solution but greater than that of GEM solution by 1.5-fold when their concentration in MEM increased to 0.3 %v/v. Microscopic studies show that the microemulsions stimulated apoptosis in MCF-7 and HCT116 cell within 48 h and at low concentration (0.03 %v/v).
Conclusion: Microemulsion formulations improved the efficacy of GEM and induced apoptosis in MCF-7 and HCT116 cells.

Keywords: Apoptosis, MCF-7 breast cancer cells, HCT116 colon cancer cells, Hemolysis, Sulphorhodamine B assay, Microemulsion

Impact Factor
Thompson Reuters (ISI): 0.6 (2023)
H-5 index (Google Scholar): 49 (2023)

Article Tools

Share this article with



Article status: Free
Fulltext in PDF
Similar articles in Google
Similar article in this Journal:

Archives

2024; 23: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10
2023; 22: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2022; 21: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2021; 20: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2020; 19: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2019; 18: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2018; 17: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2017; 16: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2016; 15: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2015; 14: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2014; 13: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2013; 12: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2012; 11: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2011; 10: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2010; 9: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2009; 8: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2008; 7: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2007; 6: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2006; 5: 
1,   2
2005; 4: 
1,   2
2004; 3: 
1
2003; 2: 
1,   2
2002; 1: 
1,   2

News Updates