Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Early Access

LC/MS analysis and cytotoxicity activity of oyster on different cancer cell line

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.5024
Submitted
11 September 2024
Published
07-04-2025
Versions

Abstract

Continuous attempts and studies have been conducted to discover a new agent that is highly effective against cancer cell with fewer side effects. One of these important new sources is marine organisms. A promising marine resource, reported in Chinese pharmacopeia as having antitumor properties, is the oyster shell. This research was designed to evaluate the cytotoxicity effect of oyster shell extract against three different cancer cells, first a sterile, 0.22 ?M syringe filter was used to filter 1000 mg of oyster shell dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide. The stock extract was stored at -80°C and then the active ingredients were identified using liquid chromatography-mass spectroscopy (LC-MS), while the anti-proliferative activity of oyster shell extract was evaluated by 3-(4, 5- dimethylthiazolyl-2)-2, 5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay. The analysis of oyster shell extract by LC-MS confirmed the presence of many active compounds such as coumarin, unsaturated fatty acids and glycosides. The marine oyster demonstrated significant cytotoxic activity against prostate cancer PC3 cells, with an IC50 value of 284 ?g/mL. It exhibited modest cytotoxic activity against lung cancer cells (A549) and Abelson murine leukemia cells in mice, respectively. The detected cytotoxicity of oyster extract against various cancer cell lines may open the door for future research on cytotoxic agents for cancer control.

References

  1. World Health Organization. Cancer. 2022.
  2. Debela DT, Muzazu SG, Heraro KD, Ndalama MT, Mesele BW, Haile DC, et al. New approaches and procedures for cancer treatment: Current perspectives. SAGE Open Med. 2021;12:9-20503121211034366. https://doi.org/10.1177/20503121211034366
  3. Mishra G. Serious adverse effects of anticancer drugs- A- review. Ideal Res. 2018;3:4.
  4. Schwartsmann G, Ratain MJ, Cragg GM, Wong JE, Saijo N, Parkinson DR, et al. Anticancer drug discovery and development throughout the world. J Clin Onco. 2002;20:47S-59S. http://10.1200/JCO.2002.07.122
  5. Dehelean CA, Marcovici I, Soica C, Mioc M, Coricovac D, Lurciuc S, et al. Plant-derived anticancer compounds as new perspectives in drug discovery and alternative therapy. Mol. 2021;26(4):1109. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26041109
  6. Naeem A, Hu P, Yang M, Zhang J, Liu, Zhu W, et al. Natural products as anticancer agents: Current status and future prospective. Mol. 2022;27(23):8367. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27238367
  7. Mali SB. Cancer treatment: Role of natural products. Time to have a serious rethink. Oral Onco Rep. 2023;6:100040. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.oor.2023.100040
  8. Abdalla YOA, Subramaniam B, Nyamathulla S, Shamsuddin, Arshad NM, Mun KS, et al. Natural products for cancer therapy: A review of their mechanism of actions and toxicity in the past decade. J Tropical Med. 2022;11:5794350. http://doi:10.1155/2022/5794350
  9. Huang M, Lu J, Ding J. Natural products in cancer therapy: Past, present and future. Nat Prod Bioprospect. 2021;11:5-13. http://doi.org/10.1007/s13659-020-00293-7
  10. Jimenez PC, Wilke DV, Costa-Lotufo LV. Marine drugs for cancer: Surfacing biotechnological innovations from the oceans. Clinics. 2018;73(suppl 1):e482s. http://dx.doi.org/10.6061/clinics/2018/e482s
  11. Saeed AF, Su J, Ouyang S. Marine-derived drugs: Recent advances in cancer therapy and immune signaling. Biomed Pharmaco. 2021;134:111091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2020.111091
  12. Chen Y, Jiang Y, Liao L, Zhu X, Tang S, Yang Q, et al. Inhibition of 4 NQO-induced oral carcinogenesis by dietary oyster shell calcium. Integr Cancer Ther. 2016;15(1):96-101. http://doi.org/10.1177/1534735415596572
  13. Guo Z, Zhao F, Chen H, Tu M, Tao S, Wang Z, et al. Heat treatments of peptides from oyster (Crassostrea gigas) and the impact on their digestibility and angiotensin I converting enzyme inhibitory activity. Food Sci Biotechnol. 2020;29(7):961–67. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10068-020-00736-4
  14. Ulagesan S, Park SJ, Nam TJ, Choi YH. Antioxidant and protective effects of a peptide (VTAL) derived from simulated gastrointestinal digestion of protein hydrolysates of Magallana gigas against acetaminophen-induced HepG2 cells. Fish Sci. 2023;89:71–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12562-022-01639-5
  15. Maury NK. Nutraceutical potential of oyster. 2021;10:1. http://doi.org/10.37591/RRJoFST
  16. Fujita T, Fukase M, Miyamoto H, Matsumoto T, Ohue T. Increase of bone mineral density by calcium supplement with oyster shell electrolysate. Bone Mineral. 1990;11(1):85-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-6009(90)90017-A
  17. Kola Srinivas NS, Verma R, Pai Kulyadi G, Kumar L. A quality by design approach on polymeric nanocarrier delivery of gefitinib: Formulation, in vitro and in vivo characterization. Int J Nanomed. 2016;16(12):15-28. http://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S122729
  18. Gratreak BDK. Basic cell culture maintenance: Splitting cells. https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.nszdef6
  19. Tolosa L, Donato MT, Gómez-Lechón MJ. General cytotoxicity assessment by means of the MTT assay. In: Vinken M, Rogiers V, editors. Protocols in in vitro hepatocyte research. Methods in molecular biology. Humana Press, New York; 2015. p.1250. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2074-7_26
  20. Kumar P, Nagarajan A, Uchil PD. Analysis of cell viability by the MTT assay. Cold Spring Harb Protoc. 2018. http://doi.org/10.1101/pdb.prot095505
  21. Castaneda AM, Melendez CM, Uribe D, Pedroza-Diaz J. Synergistic effects of natural compounds and conventional chemotherapeutic agents: Recent insights for the development of cancer treatment strategies. Heliyon. 2022;8(6):09519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09519
  22. Cheon C, Ko SG. Synergistic effects of natural products in combination with anticancer agents in prostate cancer: A scoping review. Front Pharmacol. 2022;13:963317. http://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2022.963317
  23. Ibrahim DM, Jumal J, Harun FW. Cytotoxic activity of coumarin derivatives and their complexes. Int J Res. 2015;2(4):132-51.
  24. Kawase M, Sakagami H, Hashimoto K, Tani S, Hauer H, Chatterjee SS. Structure-cytotoxic activity relationships of simple hydroxylated coumarins. Anticancer Res. 2003;23(4):3243-46.
  25. Flores-Morales V, Villasana-Ruíz AP, Garza-Veloz I, González-Delgado S, Martinez-Fierro ML. Therapeutic effects of coumarins with different substitution patterns. Mol. 2023;28(5):2413. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28052413
  26. Domagata D, Leszczynska T, Koronowicz A, Domagata B, Drozdowska M, Piasna-Stupecka E. Mechanisms of anticancer activity of a fatty acid mixture extracted from hen egg yolks enriched in conjugated linoleic acid diene (CLA) against WM793 melanoma cells. Nutri. 2021;13(7):2348. http://doi.org/10.3390/nu13072348
  27. Igarashi M, Miyazawa T. Newly recognized cytotoxic effect of conjugated trienoic fatty acids on cultured human tumor cells. Cancer Lett. 2000;148(2):173-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3835(99)00332-8
  28. Rajendran P, Rengarajan T, Nandakumar N, Palaniswami R, Nishigaki Y, Ikuo Nishigaki. Kaempferol, a potential cytostatic and cure for inflammatory disorders. Europ J Med Chem. 2014;86:103-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmech.2014.08.011
  29. Yildiz I, Sen O, Erenler R, Demirtas I, Behcet L. Bioactivity–guided isolation of flavonoids from Cynanchum acutum L. subsp. sibiricum (willd.) Rech. f. and investigation of their antiproliferative activity. Nat Prod Res. 2017;31(22):2629–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786419.2017.1289201
  30. Engen A, Maeda J, Wozniak DE, Brents CA, Bell JJ, Uesaka M, et al. Induction of cytotoxic and genotoxic responses by natural and novel quercetin glycosides. Mut Res/Genet Toxic Environ Mutage. 2015;784-785:15-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2015.04.007

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.