Antioxidant and Cytotoxicity Potential of Piperine and Sorafenib combination in human MDA-MB-231 Breast Cancer cells

Mohany, Hany; Mahmoud, Mohammad A.; El-Shehawy, Ashraf A.; Gaber, Mohamed; Elmetwalli, Alaa; Salama, Afrah F.; El Sewedy, Tarek

doi:10.21608/blj.2021.200558

Antioxidant and Cytotoxicity Potential of Piperine and Sorafenib combination in human MDA-MB-231 Breast Cancer cells

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

¹ Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Kafr el sheikh University.

² Chemistry Department, Faculty of Science, Tanta University

³ Department of Clinical Trial Research Unit and Drug Discovery, Egyptian Liver Research Institute and Hospital (ELRIAH), Mansoura, Egypt.

⁴ Biochemistry Section, Chemistry Department, Faculty of Science, Tanta University.

⁵ Department of Applied Medical Chemistry, Medical Research Institute, Alexandria University

10.21608/blj.2021.200558

Abstract

Background: Breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed in women. Worldwide, it is the second most common cause of cancer-related mortality among women. Plants have been the primary sources of natural product drug discovery, over 60% of the current anticancer drugs were derived from natural sources. Piperine (PIP) is a major bioactive constituent of the black pepper (Piper nigrum). Aim: We have assessed the cytotoxicity of PIP and the anti-hepatocellular carcinoma drug Sorafenib (SOR) against human triple negative breast cancer MDA-MB-321 cell line. Furthermore, we have investigated the potential effect of single and their combined treatment on antioxidant enzyme activity and lipid peroxidation status. Methods: We measured cytotoxicity of PIP and SOR in MDA-MB-321 cells by MTT assay after 48 hours treatment. Activity of the antioxidant enzymes superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT) and the lipid peroxidation marker Malondialdehyde (MDA) were measured colorimetrically. Results: Both PIP and SOR caused a significant (P<0.001) dose dependent cell death in MDA-MB-321 cells. However, SOR showed higher cytotoxicity (IC₉₀= 144.8 ± 5.1µg/ml) compared to PIP (IC₉₀= 252.4 ± 6.7µg/ml). Consistent with these data, SOR individual treatment caused the highest significant SOD and CAT activities while their combined treatment caused the lowest MDA levels (4.2 ± 0.2 nmol/ml) compared with the control untreated (7.7 ± 0.2 nmol/ml) or DMSO treated cells (7.76 ± 0.25 nmol/ml).
Conclusion: This study points out a potential mode of action for PIP and SOR as anticancer agents in triple negative breast cancer cells through the regulation of their antioxidant and lipid peroxidation status.

Keywords