Immune modulatory potentials of antineoplaston A-10 in breast cancer patients

Badria, Farid A.; Mabed, Mohamed; El-Awadi, Mohamed; Abou-Zeid, Laila A.; Al-Nashar, Eman; Hawas, Samia

doi:10.1016/s0304-3835(00)00472-9

Cited by 14 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recently, many antitumor compounds with new structural features and mechanism of action have been isolated from natural products. Natural products serve as a good and affordable source for new drug entities [13][14][15][16][17][18][19].…”

Section: Evaluate the Cytotoxic Activity Of Honey Propolis And Bee mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluate the cytotoxic activity of honey, propolis, and bee venom from different localities in Egypt against liver, breast, and colorectal cancer

Badria¹,

Fathy²,

Fatehe³

et al. 2017

J Apither

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Cancer is a large group of disorders characterized by uncontrolled cellular proliferation. It is one of the most devastating diseases all over the world. Recently, there is an increased interest in the clinical use of natural products as a safe, efficient, and economic therapeutic alternative. Honey bee products therapy, apitherapy, was used to control various diseases including cancer. Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to screen potential cytotoxic effects of honey bee products against different cancer types. Materials and Methods: Samples of honey, venom and propolis were collected from different Egyptian localities with different techniques and tested by MTT cell-based assay against liver (HeP-G2), breast (MCF-7), and colorectal (Caco-2) cancer cell lines. Results: The results showed that, Italian dissected method-bee venom was the most active among all the tested samples against Hep-G2 (93.92%), Caco-2 (93.92%) and MCF-7 (90.17%). However, Libyan propolis proved to be most active among all tested propolis samples. On the other hand, all tested honey samples showed non-remarkable activities except Asyut-clover honey (49.84% against Caco-2 cell line). Conclusion: The results showed that, bee venom, propolis and honey are interesting agents that have valuable activities against Hep-G2, Caco-2 and MCF-7 with bee venom being the most effective agent that might be incorporated in cancer remedy regimens after further studies.

show abstract

Section: Evaluate the Cytotoxic Activity Of Honey Propolis And Bee mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluate the cytotoxic activity of honey, propolis, and bee venom from different localities in Egypt against liver, breast, and colorectal cancer

Badria¹,

Fathy²,

Fatehe³

et al. 2017

J Apither

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Antineoplaston A-10 (3-phenylacetylamino-2,6-piperidinedione) is the ®rst chemically identi®ed APNI and has potential utility in breast cancer treatment (Badria, Mabed, El-Awadi et al, 2000;Badria, Mabed, Khafagy & Abou-Zeid, 2000). A-10 and its metabolites have shown promising cytostatic responses when challenged on tumor tissue cultures or when administered to human patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (Abou-Zeid et al, 2001).…”

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 99%

(4S)-4-(Methoxycarbonylmethylaminocarbonyl)-4-(3,4,5-trimethoxybenzamido)butanoic acid

et al. 2005

Acta Cryst E

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Novel Piperidinedione Analogs as Inhibitors of Breast Cancer Cell Growth

Abou-Zeid

El‐Mowafy

El‐Ashmawy

et al. 2000

Arch. Pharm. Pharm. Med. Chem.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We previously reported the utility of antineoplaston‐A10 (3‐phenylacetylamino‐2,6‐piperidinedione) as an endogenous cancer protector and immune modulator in breast cancer patients (Cancer Lett., 2000, 157, 57). In this study, four new piperidinedione A10 analogs were synthesized and tested for their antimitotic activity on a human breast cancer cell line against the prototype A10 and the antibreast cancer drug tamoxifen. Moreover, the DNA binding capacity of such compounds was evaluated against A10. (E)‐3‐(4‐Nitrocinnamoylamino)‐2,6‐piperidinedione “3B” and (E)‐3‐(4‐hydroxycinnamoylamino)‐2,6‐piperidinedione “3D” were several‐fold more potent antiproliferative agents than A10 and tamoxifen. They also had significantly higher capacity to bind DNA than A10. Conversely, (E)‐3‐(cinnamoylamino)‐2,6‐piperidinedione “3A” and (E)‐3‐(4‐methoxycinnamoylamino)‐2,6‐piperidinedione) “3C” had weaker biological profiles than the lead compound A10. Detailed synthetic, spectroscopic, and biological data are reported.

show abstract

Immune modulatory potentials of antineoplaston A-10 in breast cancer patients

Cited by 14 publications

References 21 publications

Evaluate the cytotoxic activity of honey, propolis, and bee venom from different localities in Egypt against liver, breast, and colorectal cancer

Evaluate the cytotoxic activity of honey, propolis, and bee venom from different localities in Egypt against liver, breast, and colorectal cancer

(4S)-4-(Methoxycarbonylmethylaminocarbonyl)-4-(3,4,5-trimethoxybenzamido)butanoic acid

Novel Piperidinedione Analogs as Inhibitors of Breast Cancer Cell Growth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About