Phcog.Net logo
Submit

BROWSE ALL JOURNALS

    SEE ALL 6 JOURNALS
    Pharmacognosy MagazineNOW IN
    Article

    Antioxidative and Photocytotoxic Effects of Standardized Clinacanthus nutans and Strobilanthes crispus Extracts toward HepG2 Liver Cells

    Sheri‑Ann Tan1, Shi Yun Lim1, Chieu Shie Law1, Chen Son Yue2, Tze Ven Poh3, Wan Zuhainis Saad4, Saila Ismail4, Khatijah Mohamad Yusoff4, Chui Fung Loke1★★ Corresponding author

    1. 1Departments of Bioscience, University College.
    2. 2Physical Science, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Tunku Abdul Rahman University College.
    3. 3Department of Computer Science and Embedded Systems, Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, Tunku Abdul Rahman University College, Kuala Lumpur.
    4. 4Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, University College, Malaysia.

    CORRESPONDENCE

    Chui Fung Loke

    Departments of Bioscience, University College.

    lokecf@tarc.edu.my

    Received: 08-03-2019; Revised: 04-04-2019.

    Volume 15, Issue 65 · pp. 613–620 · PUBLISHED 19 September 2019 · DOI: 10.4103/pm.pm_84_19

    View on Pharmacogn. Mag. original site ↗

    ABSTRACT

    Objective: The present study aimed to determine the antioxidative and photocytotoxic effects of CME and SME toward liver cancer cells. Materials and Methods: Cell‑based (2′,7′‑dichlorodihydrofluorescein diacetate) and chemical‑based (2,2‑diphenyl‑1‑picrylhydrazyl [DPPH]) experiments were utilized to determine the antioxidative properties of both herbal extracts. CME and SME were also tested for their photocytotoxic potentials after photodynamic therapy (PDT). Phytochemical analysis was performed to identify the phytocompounds present in the extracts. Results: Both the extracts demonstrated dose‑dependent DPPH radical scavenging activities, while SME was found to be a stronger reactive oxygen species scavenger than CME at all concentrations tested on liver cells. Interestingly, on PDT, HepG2 cells treated with SME and CME at non- toxic doses showed a decrease in cellular viability charting half‑maximal inhibitory concentration of 13.45 μg/mL and 81.03 μg/mL, respectively. Total phenolic content of SME (36.27 ± 1.31 mg GAE/g extract) was slightly higher than CME (31.76 ± 0.10 mg GAE/g extract). On the contrary, the total flavonoid content of CME (11.32 ± 0.28 mg QE/g extract) was approximately seven times more than SME (1.69 ± 0.03 mg QE/g extract). Phenolic acids, flavonoids, and pheophorbide‑a were identified in both extracts. In view of this, these phytocompounds present in CME and SME could lead to the observed beneficial effects. Conclusion: CME and SME, especially the latter, are strong antioxidants with photosensitizing potentials that should be further investigated.

    KEYWORDS

    Open in new tab

    REFERENCES

    As published

    Showing references and in-text citations exactly as published.

      Cite this article

      SELECT FORMAT

      Tan, S., Lim, S. Y., Law, C. S., Yue, C. S., Poh, T. V., Saad, W. Z., Ismail, S., Yusoff, K. M., & Loke, C. F. (2019). Antioxidative and Photocytotoxic Effects of Standardized Clinacanthus nutans and Strobilanthes crispus Extracts toward HepG2 Liver Cells. Pharmacognosy Magazine, 15(65), 613–620. https://doi.org/10.4103/pm.pm_84_19