Natural radioprotectors and their impact on cancer drug discovery

Abstract

Cancer is a complex multifaceted illness that affects different patients in discrete ways. For a number of cancers the use of chemotherapy has become standard practice. Chemotherapy is a use of cytostatic drugs to cure cancer. Cytostatic agents not only affect cancer cells but also affect the growth of normal cells; leading to side effects. Because of this, radiotherapy gained importance in treating cancer. Slaughtering of cancerous cells by radiotherapy depends on the radiosensitivity of the tumor cells. Efforts to improve the therapeutic ratio have resulted in the development of compounds that increase the radiosensitivity of tumor cells or protect the normal cells from the effects of radiation. Amifostine is the only chemical radioprotector approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but due to its side effect and toxicity, use of this compound was also failed. Hence the use of herbal radioprotectors bearing pharmacological properties is concentrated due to their low toxicity and efficacy. Notably, in silico methods can expedite drug discovery process, to lessen the compounds with unfavorable pharmacological properties at an early stage of drug development. Hence a detailed perspective of these properties, in accordance with their prediction and measurement, are pivotal for a successful identification of radioprotectors by drug discovery process.

Assessment of monoamine neurotransmitters in the cortex and cerebellum of gamma-irradiated mice: A neuromodulatory role of Cynodon dactylon

“…Even though several synthetic agents were projected as effective radioprotectors, their usage was limited due to their side effects. [ 14 ] The present study demonstrates the phytotherapeutic significance of C. dactylon as an effective radioprotective agent in the distinct brain tissues. Till date, no study has explored the radioprotective potential of C. dactylon against radiation-induced neurotransmitter alterations in the cerebral cortex and cerebellum.…”

<p>Impact of bladder volume on treatment planning and clinical outcomes of radiotherapy for patients with cervical cancer</p>

“…However, acute and late radiation-induced proctitis and cystitis are still inevitable due to the anatomical position and physical properties of X-rays 32,33. Although radiation protectants including sulfhydryl compounds, nitroxides, antioxidant compounds, and nonantioxidant radioprotectors have been tried with some success,34 the side effects and cost-effectiveness are still important considerations for developing these agents 35,36. The method of adjusting the bladder volume to change the dose of target and OARs may be the most feasible and cost-effective approach.…”

Radioprotective potential of Costus afer against the radiation-induced hematological and histopathological damage in mice

“…Radiotherapy is the other. Radiotherapy is the medical use of ionizing radiation in cancerous cells’ treatment [ 5 , 6 ]. However, one significant challenge in cancer cells’ radiotherapy is the exposure of surrounding tissues to undesirable radiation doses, leading to biological damage [ 5 ].…”

“…During this time, more than 4,000 compounds were synthesised and tested. One of the active compounds discovered during the same study was WR-2721, also known as amifostine [ 6 ]. To date, it remains the most reliable of those synthesised in the Walter Reed series [ 11 ], and amifostine is the only radioprotective drug approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in radiation treatment [ 6 ].…”

“…To date, it remains the most reliable of those synthesised in the Walter Reed series [ 11 ], and amifostine is the only radioprotective drug approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in radiation treatment [ 6 ]. Although amifostine was the only radioprotector drug approved by FDA against radiation, for thwarting xerostomia in patients treated for head and necked cancer, there remains its cumulative toxicity on daily administration with radiotherapy, which was revealed in sneezing, allergic reactions, somnolence, hypotension, and nausea [ 6 , 11 ]. Thus, an urgent need to find an alternative natural substance with similar characteristics to the synthetic compound can offer protection against radiation while remaining non-toxic, effective, available and affordable.…”