targeting wnt signaling pathway in colorectal cancer stem...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Targeting Wnt signaling pathway in colorectal
cancer stem cells
Research internship
October 2013-February 2014
Student details Kirsten Marije Jansma s1968785 +31 646213199 [email protected] Department details/ External supervisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. S.C. Cheah, PhD Head of Department, Research & Innovation Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences UCSI University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia [email protected] Faculty supervisor Prof. Dr. S. de Jong, PhD Department of Medical Oncology University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen
Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ Groningen
2
Abstract Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most lethal types of cancer in the Western world. Even
though more effective screening methods and early detection of polyps have led to a decrease in
mortality rate, the patient’s prognosis still is poor in general. Recent studies identified the role of
cancer stem cells (CSC) in tumor initiation, growth and maintenance of colorectal cancer. These
CSC’s are less sensitive to classic cytostatic agents, therefore new targeted therapeutic
approaches have to be identified. Stem cell maintenance, cell proliferation, differentiation and
apoptosis is partly driven by canonical Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway, thereby playing an
important role in gene transcription. Using phytochemical agents, we tried to inhibit this Wnt/β-
catenin signaling pathway in colorectal cancer stem cells. The MTT assay and iCelligence
realtime system were used to determine cytotoxicity of these agents. We found strong reduction
in cell number in HCT116 cells by all Cucurbitacins, but iCelligence was not appropriate to
measure cytotoxicity in CSC’s. By using a β-catenin activation kit, we saw that nuclear β-
translocation was reduced after treatment with Cucurbitacin B and Demethoxycurcumin.
Apoptosis, measured by Hoechst staining, was induced by Cucurbitacin B, E and
Demethoxycurcumin. A significant reduction of LGR5 protein expression was seen in samples
treated with Cucurbitacin B, E and Demethoxycurcumin. Our results suggest inhibition of Wnt
signaling pathway by Cucurbitacin B and Demethoxycurcumin. Further research is required to
determine the potential role of these agents in colorectal cancer therapy.
Samenvatting Colorectaal carcinoom is een van de dodelijkste vormen van kanker in de Westerse wereld. De
prognose is vaak slecht, ondanks betere screeningmethodes en vroege detectie van poliepen.
Recentelijk is aangetoond dat kanker stamcellen (CSC) een rol spelen in tumorigenese, groei en
voortbestaan van colorectaal carcinoom. Omdat deze CSC’s minder gevoelig zijn voor huidige
chemotherapie is het van belang om nieuwe therapieën te ontwikkelen die zich specifieker
richten op pathogenetische aspecten. ‘Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway’ speelt een belangrijke
rol in het behoud van stamcellen, en diens proliferatie, differentiatie en apoptose. Wij
onderzochten of bepaalde fytochemische stoffen deze Wnt/β-catenin signaling remmen in
CSC’s. Eerst werd de cytotoxiciteit gemeten met behulp van MTT assay en iCelligence realtime
system. We vonden hierbij een sterke afname in aantal cellen in HCT116 cellen door de
Cucurbitacins, maar iCelligence was niet geschikt voor CSC’s. Daarna toonden wij verminderde
verplaatsing van β-catenin naar de celkern aan door Cucurbitacin B en Demethoxycurcumin.
Apoptose – gemeten met Hoechst staining - was verhoogd in de cellen die behandeld waren met
Cucurbitacin B, E en Demethoxycurcumin. Verder werd een significante vermindering van
LGR5 expressie gevonden na behandeling met Cucurbitacin B, E en Demethoxycurcumin. Onze
resultaten doen sterk vermoeden dat Cucurbitacin B en Demethoxycurcumin een remmend effect
hebben op het Wnt signaling pathway. Nader onderzoek is nodig om een eventuele rol van deze
twee middelen in de behandeling van colorectaal carcinoom vast te kunnen stellen.
3
Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 4
Research question ........................................................................................................................... 6
Methods........................................................................................................................................... 7
Results ........................................................................................................................................... 11
Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 18
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 21
References ..................................................................................................................................... 22
Appendix……………………........................................................................................................26
List of abbreviations
5-FU 5-fluorouracil
CI cell index
CRC colorectal cancer
CSC cancer stem cells
DAPI 4,6-diamino-2-phenylindole (fluorescent stain)
DMEM Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium
DMSO dimethylsulfoxide
EDTA ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid
ELISA enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
GSK-3 glycogen synthase kinase-3
IC50 concentration of drug inhibiting 50% of the cell growth
LGR5 leucine-rich repeat-containing G protein-coupled receptor 5
MTT 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2-5-diphenyltatrazolium bromide
TNM TNM Classification of Malignant Tumors; T (tumor) N (nodes) M (metastasis)
4
Introduction
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most lethal types of cancer in the United States; here,
approximately 9% of all cancer-related deaths is due to colorectal cancer1. In the Netherlands,
colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer type in men and the second most common
cancer type in women. Currently, a slight increase in incidence can be seen in Dutch population,
due to ageing and growth of the population2.
Although the mortality rate has been decreasing during the past decades, this is rather thanks to
more effective screening methods and early detection of polyps and malignancies instead of
better treatment options3. Overall five-years survival rates of colorectal cancer are on average
65%1.
The TNM-stage of the colorectal cancer is the main predictor of the prognosis. The treatment of
choice for primary CRC stage I-III is surgical resection of the tumor and its nearby located
lymph nodes and blood vessels. Adjuvant chemotherapy consisting of the FOLFOX
chemotherapy regimen after surgical resection helps to eliminate local and distant
micrometastases. Therefore it lowers the risk of disease relapse and metastasis4. The INT0035
study5 showed a 15% absolute risk reduction of recidives and a 16% absolute mortality risk
reduction in colorectal carcinoma stage III-patients when treated with 5-fluorouracil+levamisol.
Still, around 40% of the patients treated with both resection and adjuvant therapy for stage II or
III colorectal cancer will suffer from disease relapse6.
As a consequence, better therapeutic approaches have to be identified in future. Now that there
has been a lot of research in the pathogenesis of colorectal cancer, there is more understanding of
the changes in genes and proteins that lead to the development of cancer. Therefore it is
becoming less complicated to develop personalized treatment. So where chemotherapy is mainly
aiming at rapidly growing cells hence not discriminating between proliferating tumor and non-
tumor cells, targeted therapies try to attack mutated cells only. For instance, bevacizumab is a
target of Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and, when given in addition to
chemotherapy it can prolong life by 8 months7. However, even though bevacizumab is targeting
the VEGF pathway specifically, it does not mean that there are only a few side effects. A study
showed that the combination of bevacizumab with 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan and leucovorin puts
patients at higher risk for hypertension, epistaxis and wound-healing problems8.
For a long time, colorectal cancer was believed to consist of a group of tumor cells with the same
characteristics, and therefore every cell should have the same capabilities to divide and
metastasize. Recent studies identified the role of cancer stem cells (CSC) in tumor initiation,
growth and maintenance in colorectal cancer. In this theory, malignancies are the result of few
cells that have stemcell-like characteristics. Thereby, these cells can potentially be held
responsible for tumor relapse and metastasis after therapy has been given – not only in colorectal
5
cancer but in many other tumor types as well9. Just like other stem cell types, cancer stem cells
are capable of self-renewal and differentiation, and are differentiating into both the tumorigenic
and non-tumorigenic cells that are present in a tumor cell population10
. Still, researchers struggle
with the question from which cells the cancer stem cells are derived. Some assume that they are
mutated in stem cells that can be found in most tissues under normal circumstances, considering
the fact that stem cells are more prone to mutations for their capabilities of self-renewal and
extended lifespan11
.
Research has shown that cancer stem cells are less sensitive to both chemotherapeutic agents and
radiotherapy12,13
. This is also a reasonable cause of the frequent incidence of metastasis and
relapse in colorectal cancer after (adjuvant) treatment with one of these therapies. Hence,
exploring new therapeutic targets in cancer stem cells is challenging.
Stem cell maintenance, cell proliferation, differentiation and apoptosis is partly driven by
canonical Wnt signaling pathway. This pathway is a cascade of different proteins that transduce
signals from outside the cell to the nucleus. It plays a crucial role in gene transcription. In the
presence of Wnt ligands, β-catenin translocates to the nucleus, where it is essential for activating
transcription factors such as TCF4.
Excessive Wnt signaling is thought to be important in the pathogenesis of colorectal cancer. In
over 90% of all colorectal cancer cases, there is a mutation that leads to initiation of the Wnt
signaling pathway14
. As a consequence, a lot of research is now being conducted to identify
targets for the purpose of inhibiting the Wnt signaling pathway. This might be an effective
method to provoke apoptosis in cells with a constitutively activated Wnt pathway, thereby
preventing the CSC’s from excessive cell proliferation and differentiation15,16,17
. Dakeng et al.18
found a reduction of Wnt-associated proteins and intranuclear beta-catenin after inhibition of
Wnt signaling by Cucurbitacin B in breast cancer cells.
Colorectal cancer stem cells can be identified with markers such as LGR5 and CD133. Leucine-
rich repeat-containing G protein-coupled receptor 5 (LGR5) is a receptor of R-spondin family,
which promotes Wnt/β-catenin- signaling. Therefore, overexpression of LGR5 is thought to be
important in the pathogenesis of colorectal cancer, presumably by excessive Wnt/β-catenin
signaling19
. Hsu20
et al found that higher LGR5 protein levels were significantly corresponding
with higher stages in TNM classification system and with metastasis. Also, survival rates and
recurrence rates of colorectal cancer patients were higher among those with high LGR5 levels.
The response to treatment with 5-fluorouracil was higher when LGR5 expression was low, with
a 65% response rate and 37% response rate for low and high LGR5 expressing tumors
respectively. Therefore, it is assumed that in colorectal cancer the level of LGR5 expression is
correlated with the progression of the disease and the response to treatment.
6
Research question
The main question of this research is ‘Are phytochemicals effective inhibitors of the Wnt
signaling pathway in colorectal cancer stem cells?’. In this research internship we determined
whether phyotchemicals inhibit the Wnt pathway signaling and thus may be potential inhibitors
of colorectal cancer stem cell’s regulation of cell differentiation and self-renewal.
The effects of the phytochemicals were measured regarding:
- Intracellular distribution of beta-catenin with Cellomics® beta catenin activation kit
(Thermo scientific)
- Cytotoxicity assessment using MTT assay and ACEA Bioscience’s iCelligence system
- Hoechst staining was used as an indicator dye to detect apoptosis.
- LGR5 expression in the cell line was measured with colorimetric ELISA.
Hypothesis
‘LGR5-positive colorectal cancer stem cells are sensitive to phytochemicals that inhibit the Wnt-
signaling pathway’
We expected that in cell lines treated with Wnt-inhibiting compounds a smaller amount of β-
catenin is seen in the nucleus compared with control groups due to the reduced Wnt-signaling
and therefore redeuced translocation of β-catenin from cytoplasm to nucleus.
We hypothesized that the amount of cells in apoptosis is higher in cells treated with the Wnt-
inhibiting phytochemicals compared with both control groups (untreated and treated with 5-
fluorouracil). As mentioned above, it is known that cancer stem cells are less susceptible to
treatment with cytostatic agents.
Although this is not evidence-based, we supposed that there is less LGR5 expression in cell line
treated with Wnt-inhibitors. Since LGR5 is a downstream target of β-catenin, this is a plausible
assumption. Scannell et al.21
found that the degree of LGR5 expression is related to the
aggressiveness of the cancer stem cell population.
7
Methods
Cell culture
Colon cancer stem cells isolated from colorectal carcinoma cell line HCT116 were obtained
from ProMab Biotechnologies and were cultured in fresh Cancer Stem PremiumTM
medium
(ProMab) in a humidified atmosphere containing 5% CO2 at 370C. Cells were subcultured and/or
collected by using a 0.25% (v/v) trypsin-EDTA solution. Every two days, the cells were refed
with Cancer Stem Premium medium in an amount of extra 10% of the total volume
The colorectal carcinoma cell line, HCT116 (ATCC) was cultured in Dulbecco’s modified
Eagle’s medium (DMEM) containing 10% heath-inactivated fetal bovine serum (FBS), 1%
penicillin+streptomycin solution and 1% sodium pyruvate solution, also stored in a humidified
atmosphere with 5%CO2 and at 370C . A 0.25% (v/v) trypsin-EDTA solution was used to
subculture and collect the cells. The HCT116 cell line was used as control group during every
step in the protocol.
Drugs preparation
The phytochemicals used were:
1) Cucurbitacin B
2) Cucurbitacin E
3) Cucurbitacin I
4) Demethoxycurcumin
Cells also were treated with the cytostatic agent 5-fluorouracil, which is often used in the
treatment of colorectal cancer. The 5-fluorouracil served as positive control to the used
compounds. All compounds were obtained from Chromadex (Irvine – CA).
Every compound was dissolved in dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) to a 5 mg/mL solution. Then the
compounds were aliquot and stored at -300C.
Cytotoxicity assessment by using MTT assay
The anti-proliferation abilities of the phytochemicals were assessed by using MTT (3-(4,5-
dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2-5-diphenyltatrazolium bromide) assay. Once the confluency of the cell
line flask was 70-80%, the cell line flasks and the cancer stem cells plates were washed twice
with PBS and after trypsinization, resuspended with DMEM and Cancer Stem Premium media
for cell line and enriched stem cells, respectively. Next, the cells (at a density of 1x104 per well)
were seeded to a 96-well plate and incubated for 24 hours at 37oC with 5% CO2. Then, the cells
were treated with the phytochemical compounds, in different concentrations starting from 100
μg/mL to 3.125 μg/mL (using dilution factor 2).
After the treatment was added to the wells, the cells were cultured in the incubator for 24, 48 and
72 hours, respectively.
After the end point, cells were left incubating at 370C for 3 hours after 50 μL of MTT solution of
2 mg/mL was added to each well. Thereafter, the supernatant was discarded and 50μL of DMSO
was added to each well to dissolve the formazan product of the MTT solution. ELISA (Bio-Tek
ELx800 Absorbance Microplate Reader) was used to read the assay at the wavelength of 570nm.
8
The percentage of viability as expressed as absorbance in the presence of test compound as a
percentage of that in the vehicle control. IC50 values were calculated using GraphPad Prism 5.0
software (GraphPad software Inc) with the aid of the dose-response curve.
Cytotoxicity assessment by using realtime iCelligence System
Realtime measuring of the anti-proliferation properties of the compounds was assessed by using
the RTCA iCelligence system (ACEA Biosciences).
HCT116
Once the confluency of the culture reached 70-80%, cells were washed twice with PBS and
collected after trypsinization. 150μL of DMEM media was transferred to each well in a E-plate
L8 (ACEA), to serve as background. Then, 30000 cells in 300 μL were added to each well in the
E-plate. Overnight, the plates were kept at a 370C humidified atmosphere containing 5% CO2.
After 24 hours of incubating, 150μL of compound (dissolved in DMEM media) was transferred
to the E-plate in various concentrations. Also, for every E-plate, we kept one well as negative
control, and we transferred 150μL of a 50 μg/mL 5-Fluorouracil solution as positive control. We
chose to use Cucurbitacin B, Cucurbitacin E and Cucurbitacin I. Due to lack of time and
materials, we were not able to investigate the cytotoxicity of Demethoxycurcumin. The
cytotoxicity of the drugs were monitored every 15 minutes for 72 hours with iCelligence system.
While analyzing the outcome of the experiments, the normalization time point was set at 24
hours, right before the point where the treatment has been added.
Cancer Stem Cells
Once tumorspheres in the enriched cancer stem cell plates were clearly visible, cells were
washed twice with PBS (phosphate buffer saline) and collected after trypsinization. 150μL of
Cancer Stem Premium media was transferred to each well in a E-plate L8 (ACEA), to serve as
background. Then, 30000 cells in 300 μL were added to each well in the E-plate. Overnight, the
plates were kept at a 370C humidified atmosphere containing 5% CO2.
After 24 hours of incubating, 150μL of compound (dissolved in Cancer Stem Premium media)
was transferred to the E-plate in various concentrations. Also, for every E-plate, we kept one
well as negative control, and we transferred 150μL of a 50 μg/mL 5-Fluorouracil solution as
positive control . Here as well, Cucurbitacin B, Cucurbitacin E and Cucurbitacin I were used.
The cytotoxicity of the drugs were monitored every 15 minutes over 72 hours.
While analyzing the outcome of the experiments, the normalization time point was set at 24
hours, right before the point where the treatment has been added.
The parameter used to describe the cytotoxicity is Cell Index (CI). This is a quantitative
parameter that describes the global status of the cell, and gives information about the amount of
cells present in a well. The iCelligence system measures the impedance of the well, with Cell
Index at zero when no cells present or when no cells adhere to the well. The more cells, the
larger the CI value.
Βeta-catenin localization
Phytochemicals were assessed of the nuclear translocation of beta-catenin , by using fluorescent
beta-catenin antibody and the IN Cell Analyzer 2200 (GE Healthcare Life Sciences) .
9
When the culture reached 70-80% confluency, cells were washed twice with PBS and collected
by trypsin digestion. After, the trypsin was neutralized by DMEM or Cancer Stem Premium
media for HCT116 and enriched cancer stem cells respectively. Then, 90 μL of cell suspension
was transferred to each well of a 96-wells plate in a density of 1x104 cells per well. During 24
hours, the cells were cultured at 370C with 5%CO2. After this, the treatment was added in
various concentrations to the cells. For all compounds, a media-only well served as negative
control group. Also, GSK3 inhibitor X served as negative control, for that phosphorylation
inhibition of GSK3 is resulting in β-catenin stabilization and its subsequent translocation to the
nucleus22
,23
. The assay output parameter is the measurement of difference between the cytoplasm
intensity and nuclear intensity of β-catenin after treatment.
After 24 hours of treatment, the Cellomics Beta-Catenin Activation Kit (Thermo Scientific) was
used to detect intracellular distribution of beta-catenin and its nuclear translocation. The
performance of the experiments was according to the instructions of the manufacturer. Once the
secondary antibody was added, the further steps of the protocol were performed in a dark
environment. After the Beta-Catenin Activation Kit protocol was finished, the 96-well plates
were sealed and wrapped with aluminium foil to be kept at 4oC.
Analysis
High-content cell imaging was realized by using the IN Cell analyzer 2200 (GE Healthcare Life
Sciences). Images of each well were obtained using the IN Cell microscope through x20
objective and 341nm (DAPI), 346nm (Hoechst) and 562nm (Dylight 550) excitation filters, with
emission filters of 452nm, 497nm and 570 nm respectively.
Based on the data of the images, IN Cell 2200 Nucleus Trafficking Analysis Module (GE
Healthcare) was used to determine the quantity of beta-catenin translocation to the nucleus . This
analyzation with the Nucleus Trafficking Analysis Module was in accordance with the
manufacturer’s manual. The Collar method application inside the IN Cell 2200 Analyzer
managed to examine the fluorescence intensities of both the nucleus and cytoplasm. Thereby it
calculated the cytoplasm-to-nucleus difference.
Apoptosis
In accordance with the performance of the Cellomics Beta-catenin activation kit, Hoechst 33342
dye was added to the samples for nuclear staining. To obtain the images of the nucleus, the IN
Cell Analyzer 2200 was used. Nuclear intensity of the Hoechst 33342 was measured. Hoechst
33342 shows a brighter stain in the condensed chromatin of the apoptotic cells than the
condensed chromatin of non-apoptotic cells24
. The outcome parameter is the measurement of
nuclear Hoechst 33342 intensity.
Detection of LGR5 expression
HCT116
HCT116 cell line was subcultured into 6 new T-25 flasks. The cells were incubated until they
reached 70-80% confluency before the treatment was applied.
10
Enriched cancer stem cells
The volume of two 6-well plates containing enriched cancer stem cells with media was collected.
Then the wells were washed twice with PBS and after trypsinization, DMEM media was added
to neutralize the trypsin. The total volume was centrifuged, the supernatant was discarded and
the cell pellet was resuspended with fresh Cancer Stem Premium media. Then the suspension
was divided over two 6-well plates. The plates were kept at the incubator for two days to allow
the cancer stem cells to attach and multiply.
The amount of treatment that was added, was calculated based on the IC50 as acquired earlier
with the cytotoxicity experiments. In the case of Cucurbitacin B, E, I and Demethoxycurcumin
we used the IC50 value obtained by MTT assay. For 5-Fluorouracil, a 5 μg/mL solution was
added as a positive control.
The compounds were added to the flasks and suspended with the cells. After, the flasks were
transferred to a humidified atmosphere with 5% CO2 for a time lapse of 24 hours. After 24 hour
treatment, the treatment was stopped by collecting the cell pellet and cells were stored in cold
PBS at a 4o C environment.
Protein extraction
In order to extract membrane proteins from the samples, we used the Plasma Membrane Protein
Extraction Kit (BioVision). This kit contains buffers and reagents to efficiently extract plasma
membrane proteins specifically instead of extracting all cellular membraine proteins.
All procedures were performed according to the manufacturer’s manual. After all steps of the
protocol were completed, the plasma membrane proteins were stored at -80oC.
LGR5 ELISA protocol
Before proceeding to the LGR5 ELISA protocol, the protein that we extracted from the cell
pellets were subjected to Bradford Assay for protein quantification, and albumin was used to
generate the standard curve. After protein quantification, 20 μg/mL of each sample was used for
LGR5 assay. The Human leucine-rich repeat-containing G-protein coupled receptor 5 (LGR5)
ELISA kit (Cusabio) was used to accurately aim the LGR5 fractions in the plasma membrane
protein samples. Also in this protocol, all steps were performed in accordance with the user’s
guide provided by the manufacturer.
Data were acquired with ELISA reader (Bio-Tek ELx800 Absorbance Microplate Reader)
reading at a wavelength of 450nm. A linearized standard curve made with standard diluents was
used to assess the quantity of LGR5 in the samples.
Statistical analysis
Each experiment was performed at least two times independently. Results were expressed as the
means value ± standard deviation (SD). Statistical analysis was performed with one-way analysis
of variance (ANOVA), with Dunnett’s Multiple Comparison Test to identify between-group
differences using GraphPad Prism software (version 5.0; GraphPad Software Inc., San Diego,
CA) . Statistical significance is expressed as ***, P<0.001 ; **, P<0.01; *, P<0.05.
Log IC50 calculations were performed using the built-in algorithms for dose-response curves with
variable slope.
11
Results
Cytotoxicity MTT
In order to assess the cytotoxicity of the phytochemical compounds on colorectal cancer stem
cells (CSC) and HCT116 cells, cultured cells were treated with different drug concentrations of
the following compounds: Cucurbitacin B, Cucurbitacin E, Cucurbitacin I, Demethoxycurcumin
and 5-Fluorouracil, the latter serving as positive control. After 24, 48 and 72 hours of treatment,
cell viability was assessed by MTT assay. LGR5 expression in HCT116 and CSC’s was first
measured, and as expected, cancer stem cells (695 pg/mL) expressed much higher levels of
LGR5 protein when compared to HCT116 cells (120 pg/mL).
In HCT116 cell line, all phytochemical compounds showed a reduction in viable cells (Figure
1A-C). In the first 24 hours of treatment,
Cucurbitacin E had the strongest cytotoxic
effect with an IC50 value of 3.18 μg/mL (Table
1). After 48 hours and 72 hours as well,
Cucurbitacin E seemed to be the most potent
drug among the four compounds in HCT116
cell line. Data suggest that the potency of
Cucurbitacin B is most pronounced when cells
are treated for a minimal time lapse of 72 hours.
Demethoxycurcumin showed a more stable
trend in IC50 value among different time lapses.
In colorectal cancer stem cells, all compounds
show a tendency to reduce the cell viability
(Figure 2A-C). But the IC50 values in the CSC
samples are obviously much higher when
compared to the IC50 values in the HCT116
cells (Table 2). Striking is the relative low IC50
value for 5-Fluorouracil , when compared to the
values of the phytochemicals. Initially,
Cucurbitacin B shows a higher potency in the
first 24 hours of treatment, but somehow
appears less potent on longer-term treatment.
The other way around, Demethoxycurcumin
becomes more powerful when given for a
longer time.
HCT116 24
hrs
48
hrs
72
hrs
5-Fluorouracil 6.402 6.35 5.771
Cucurbitacin B 17.19 9.309 8.546
Cucurbitacin E 3.180 4.597 6.984
Cucurbitacin I 20.47 18.25 12.39
Demethoxycurcumin 9.815 9.668 10.49
Table 1. The IC50 values of various compounds on cell line
HCT116. All values are expressed in μg/mL
CSC 24
hrs
48
hrs
72
hrs
5-Fluorouracil 9.26 8.62 9.74
Cucurbitacin B 6.89 33.23 35.65
Cucurbitacin E 16.59 15.92 14.38
Cucurbitacin I 32.48 73.49 84.28
Demethoxycurcumin 18.68 12.45 13.48
Table 2. The IC50 vales of the various compounds on
colorectal cancer stem cells. All values are expressed in μg/mL
12
Figure 1. Effect of the compounds on HCT116 cell line. Cell number was measured using MTT assay. A: 24 hours treatment, B: 48 hours treatment, C: 72 hours treatment.
Figure 2. The effect op the phytochemical compounds on cancer stem cells. A: after 24 hours of treatment, B: after 48 hours of treatment, C: after 72 hours of treatment
13
Cytotoxicity iCelligence
We used ACEA Bioscience’s iCelligence system to measure the cytotoxicity of Cucurbitacin B,
E and I on HCT116 cells and colorectal cancer stem cells.
In HCT116 samples (Appendix IA-IC), the control group line tends to rise after normalization
point, then reaches a plateau . This is in contrast to the samples treated with Cucurbitacin B as
well as Cucurbitacin E and I. Here, the number of cells decreased rapidly after the treatment was
added. Also, 5FU showed a strong decrease in cell number, but with an initial rise in Cell Index
after treatment was given, and a fall in CI approximately 20 hours after treatment.
In colorectal cancer stem cell samples, there is not an obvious visible difference in outcome of
Cell Index. The samples treated with the phytochemical compounds show a downfall in cell
number. Also in the control samples, a gradually decrease in cell number can be seen while we
expected the CI to increase. Therefore, we conclude that iCelligence assay is not appropriate as a
tool of measuring the impedance in colorectal cancer stem cells samples. The precise cause of
this reduction in CI is not known, though we suspect that adhesion to plates is impaired. Since
the iCelligence system is a new appliance (April 2013), no literature on this phenomenon has
been published.
Using iCelligence system, we were able to acquire the IC50, the amount of the compound that is
required in order to reach a 50% inhibition in vitro. Therefore it is a measure of the drug potency.
The IC50 we were able to obtain from iCelligence, are shown in table 3A and 3B. Striking is the
rise in IC50 value in HCT116 cells after 24 and 48 hours in Cucurbitacin E and I, even though
the graphs show stable CI immediately after drug was added to the wells. Also, even the lowest
concentration of Cucurbitacin I (3.1 μg/mL) resulted in a plateau with the same CI as these of the
higher concentrations, but with IC50 value of 4.07 μg/mL. Therefore, we suspect overestimation
of IC50 values. The IC50 values of the CSC’s are not reliable, because the iCelligence system was
not appropriate in these cells.
3A CSC 24hr 48hr 72hr
Cucurbitacin
B
3.49 23.3 23.8
Cucurbitacin
E
18.0 12.0 17.0
Cucurbitacin
I
30.6 78.5 91.6
Table 3A , B; The cytotoxicity IC50 values of the phytochemicals obtained by iCelligence system A; colorectal cancer stem
cells, B: HCT116 cell line
3B HCT116 24hr 48hr 72hr
Cucurbitacin
B
10.7 11.6 6.52
Cucurbitacin
E
3.23 5.9 75.7
Cucurbitacin
I
4.07 42.3 42.9
14
B-catenin translocation
We used the Cellomics Beta-Catenin Activation Kit to assess the level of nuclear translocation of
β-catenin in both colorectal cancer stem cells and HCT116 cells. With IN Cell Analyzer 2200 we
visualized the translocation of β-catenin and were able to quantify the nuclear intensity as well.
In HCT116 cells, we noticed a significant reduction in nuclear translocation of β-catenin in the
samples treated with Cucurbitacin B (p<0.001), Cucurbitacin E (p<0.01) , Cucurbitacin I
(p<0.05) and Demethoxycurcumin (p<0.001) (Figure 3 ). Positive control GSK3 inhibitor X
showed high nuclear translocation rates.
In colorectal cancer stem cells, Cucurbitacin B (p<0.001), Cucurbitacin E (p<0.01) and
Demethoxycurcumin treatment resulted in a significant decrease in nuclear translocation of β-
catenin (Figure 4). Even though Cucurbitacin I showed a reduction in translocation to the
nucleus, this was not statistically significant. This suggests a correlation between less effective
inhibition of growth by Cucurbitacin I and therefore less reduction in β-catenin nuclear
localization. The samples treated with GSK-3 inhibitor X showed high level of nuclear β-catenin
expression, consistent with the theory that GSK-3 inhibitor X induces the translocation of the β-
catenin to the nucleus.
Figure 3. β-catenin localization in HCT116 cells. Positive index means higher nuclear β-catenin localization while negative index means higher cytoplasmic localization. In all samples, drug concentrations were 50 μg/mL.
15
Figure 4. β-catenin localization in colorectal CSC. Positive index means higher nuclear β-catenin localization while negative index means higher cytoplasmic localization. In all samples, drug concentrations were 50 μg/mL.
Apoptosis
We measured apoptosis rate using Hoechst 33342 dye, which stains the condensed chromatins of
apoptotic cells brighter than the chromatins of non-apoptotic cells. Therefore, the more apoptotic
cells, the higher the intensity of Hoechst 33342 in the nucleus.
In HCT116 cells, apoptotic rates were significantly higher in all treated samples, with
Cucurbitacin B and I with p<0.001 and Cucurbitacin E and Demethoxycurcumin with p<0.01
(Figure 5 ). The control sample treated with 5-Fluorouracil showed a significant rise in apoptosis
as well (p<0.001), this is in line with literature that shows evidence for inducing apoptosis in
cancer cells by 5-FU25
.
In colorectal CSC samples, statistically significant increase in apoptotic rate was seen after
treatment with Cucurbitacin B (p<0.01), Cucurbitacin E (p<0.05) and Demethoxycurcumin
(p<0.05) (Figure 6). Here as well, 5-FU significantly induced apoptosis (p<0.001), consistent
with published literature26
. Cucurbitacin I did not significantly induce apoptosis in CSC’s, nor
did it give significant reduction in β-catenin nucleaur translocation as stated earlier. This
supports the relation between reduction in β-catenin translocation and apoptosis, and survival in
both CSC’s and HCT116 cells27
.
16
Figure 5. Nucleus intensity in HCT116 cells. Higher nucleus intensity suggest higher apoptosis rate. In all samples, drug concentrations were 50 μg/mL.
Figure 6. Nucleus intensity in colorectal CSC. Higher nucleus intensity suggest higher apoptosis rate. In all samples, drug concentrations were 50 μg/mL.
17
LGR5 expression
Next, we analyzed the expression of LGR5 protein by extracting proteins with the Plasma
Membrane Protein Extraction Kit (BioVision), after which the LGR5 ELISA Kit (Cusabio) was
used to measure the quantity of LGR5 proteins. Thereby, we tried to correlate the β-catenin
localization with LGR5 expression.
In colorectal stem cells, treatment with Cucurbitacin B, Cucurbitacin E, Demethoxycurcumin all
showed significant reduction (p<0.001) in LGR5 expression(Figure 7), when compared to non-
treated cancer stem cells. The sample treated with Cucurbitacin B showed the lowest expression
of LGR5 proteins. Also, the positive control 5-fluorouracil gave a significant (p<0.001) decrease
in LGR5 expression.
In HCT116 samples, not a significant difference in LGR5 protein was detected, in line with
other researches that have been performed previously. In HCT116 very low endogenous LGR5
are expressed, making it almost impossible to detect the values28,29
. Main cause for the low
LGR5 fraction in the cell line is the silencing of LGR5 by DNA methylation occurring in
HCT116 cells30
.
Figure 7. LGR5 Protein expression in Colon cancer stem cells and cell line HCT116
18
Discussion
The phytochemicals Cucurbitacins are natural compounds acquired from the cucurbitaceae
plants. Officially they are considered to be in the steroid classification and they consist of a
group of triterpoid substances renowned for their toxic effect and wide range in pharmacologic
effects. There are 12 different Cucurbitacins identified, among which Cucurbitacin B is the best
studied compound. In this study, we assessed the effects of Cucurbitacin B, E and I on Wnt
signaling pathway. We also used Demethoxycurcumin, a derivate of Cucurmin, which is a
yellow substance in the Curcuma Longa spice. Various studies identified the anti-tumor effects
of Cucurmin in a variety of solid tumors. Sandur et al.31
found that Demethoxycurcumin and
other natural derivatives of Curcumin inhibit the proliferation of various tumor types to the same
extent as Curcumin does.
Initially, we performed cytotoxicity experiments with two different mechanisms: MTT assay
and iCelligence system. We found differences in IC50 values for all compounds between MTT
assay and iCelligence experiments. This may be due to the different mechanisms of the
procedures. The mechanism of the MTT assay is dependent on NAD(P)H enzymes in
metabolically active cells that convert the MTT dye to formazan. The formazan turns the
substance purple, and ELISA microplate reader is able to measure the optical density of this
fluid. On the other hand, iCelligence system relies on the attachment of cancer cells on the layer
of the plate. The more cells, the higher the impedance. More important is the fact that the
iCelligence system appeared to be an appropriate tool to measure impedance in our colorectal
cancer stem cells, resulting in reduction in cell number even in untreated samples. Furthermore,
IC50 values in HCT116 cells didn’t seem to be correct as discussed in the results section. All in
all, this explains differences in IC50 values between the both experiments. Another conclusion
that can be drawn from the IC50 values, is that in general the IC50 is higher in the CSC sample
than the values of the same compound in the HCT116 cell line sample. This might be due to
efflux pumps – for example those from the ATP-binding cassette (ABC) family - that extrude
toxic compounds from cells, however some phytochemicals are believed to inhibit these efflux
pumps and therefore reduce resistance32
.
In our hypothesis, we stated that due to impaired translocation, we expect a smaller amount of β-
catenin in the nucleus in cells treated with possible Wnt-inhibiting agents, when compared to
control groups treated with GSK-3 inhibitor. This statement is confirmed by the data in our
study. In colorectal CSC, we found a significant reduction in β-catenin translocation to the
nucleus by all tested compounds, except for Cucurbitacin I. These results are supported by
recent literature showing that in three different human breast cancer cell lines ,Cucurbitacin B is
able to inhibit translocation of β-catenin to the nucleus. Ring et al.33
found a reduction in beta-
catenin-mediated transcription by the Wnt inhibitor VS-507 in human breast cancer stem cells,
19
leading to a reduction of growth and metastasis. The precise mechanism of degrading the Wnt/β-
catenin signaling pathway by Cucurbitacin B has yet to be clarified18
.
In connection with the hypothesis on β-catenin nuclear translocation, we expected higher
apoptosis levels in these samples treated with the phytochemicals. Indeed, we found significant
rise in apoptotic rate through Cucurbitacin B, Cucurbitacin E and Demethoxycurcumin. This can
be related to the decreased β-catenin translocation. In agreement, Cucurbitacin I did not show
significant higher apoptosis rate, consistent with lack of significant reduction in β-catenin
translocation. So far, there is no literature suggesting that Cucurbitacin I can induce apoptosis by
inhibiting Wnt signaling pathway.
Even though this hypothesis is not evidence based, our hypothesis was that LGR5 protein
expression will be lower in samples treated with the Wnt-inhibiting agents, due to the fact that
LGR5 is a target gene of the Wnt/β-catenin pathway. During this research, we observed
significantly decreased levels (p<0.001) of LGR5 expression in colorectal cancer stem cell
samples treated with Cucurbitacin B, E , I and Demethoxycurcumin. Since LGR5 is a target gene
of the Wnt signaling pathway, we may conclude that there is a significant inhibition of the Wnt
pathway. Furthermore, also in the CSC samples treated with 5-fluorouracil, a significant
reduction (p<0.001) in LGR5 expression was seen. This is consistent with a study where LGR5
positive colorectal cancer stem cells were cultured in the presence of 5-FU for 24 hours. Almost
all LGR5+ cancer cells transformed to a LGR5 negative state34
.
When we compare the results of the quantification of β-catenin nuclear translocation, apoptosis
and LGR5 expression in colorectal cancer stem cells, we may assume that both Cucurbitacin B
and Demethoxycurcumin inhibit Wnt signaling pathway. Cucurbitacin E also showed significant
reduction of β-catenin translocation to the nucleus, significant reduction of LGR5 protein
expression and significant increase of apoptotic rate, but the significance level is slightly lower
when compared to the effects of Cucurbitacin B and Demethoxycurcumin. It is not exactly
clarified whether the cytotoxicity of Cucurbitacin B, E and Demethoxycurcumin is more potent
than the cytotoxicity of 5-fluorouracil in colorectal cancer stem cells.
Apart from the effect of the phytochemical compounds on Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway,
some studies suggest these agents can lead to changes in the sensitivity of tumor cells to
radiotherapy and cytostatic agents. Hsu et al.20
found that Cucurbitacin I in human non-small-
cell lung cancer CD133+ cells led to better response in chemoradiotherapy and suppression of
the stemness gene signatures of these cells. Moreover, administering of Cucurbitacin I was
inducing apoptosis35
. Same conclusions were drawn in a comparable study in which the
radiosensitivity was increased after Cucurbitacin I was given to patients with CD44+ head and
neck squamous carcinoma36
. Also, Cucurbitacin B enhances the effects of the cytostatic agent
cisplatin on laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma37
. Demethoxycurcumin can lead to higher
sensitivity in different solid tumor types, even when these cells are believed to be drug-
20
resistant38,39
. These studies suggest that Cucurbitacin B, E and I and Demethoxycurcumin could
play a role in adjuvant therapy in the treatment of colorectal cancer.
It is essential to have more research performed on the biologic effects of targeted therapy in
healthy cells as in cancer cells as well. Most of the side effects that are caused by these drugs
appear after long term use, and are therefore not reported during the early stages of drug
research40
. Often, it is difficult to correlate the side effects with the mechanism of the drug,
which makes it harder to link the side effects with the drugs. Few research on the side effects of
Wnt inhibition by the phytochemicals we used, has been done. However, in a study on
Cucurbitacin B in mice with pancreatic cancer, the main aim was to assess the toxicity of this
compound. In a concentration of up to 1 mg/kg bodyweight, no significant change was seen in
total body weight, organ weight of the liver, spleen and kidneys, no treatment-related toxicities
such as liver fibrosis was reported, and all blood parameters did not significantly differ from the
negative control group41
. However, for a safe procedure, it is indispensable that adverse effects
shall be identified before the drugs will be administered to patients.
In addition to cytotoxicity, β-catenin nuclear translocation, apoptosis and LGR5 protein
expression, more functional assessment of the phytochemicals could be useful to identify the
potency of the agents. C-Myc and Cyclin D1 are downstream targets of the Wnt/β-catenin
pathway. Published literature shows that Cucurbitacin B affects the expression of these Wnt
associated genes in breast cancer cell lines SKBR-3 and MCF742
and in pancreatic cancer cell
line Panc-143
. It is important to measure these downstream targets, for it gives some more
concrete information on the functional effects of Wnt/β-catenin inhibition. In colorectal cancer,
c-Myc stimulates the angiogenesis necessary for supplying the tumor with sufficient nutrients44
.
Cyclin D1 is important in cell cycle progression in transition from G1 to S phase and therefore it
partially drives replication. Some studies indicate that inhibition of Cyclin D1 could be a useful
approach for new anti-tumor therapies45
.
When we compare the effects of the Cucurbitacins and Demethoxycurcumin between HCT116
cells and CSC’s , the differences in apoptotic rate are low. A logical explanation for this
phenomenon is the anticancer effect of Cucurbitacins and Demethoxycurcumin on cancer cells
even without stem cell properties that includes drastic alterations of cell shape, resulting in
apoptosis46,47
. Also, there is not much difference in β-catenin localization between HCT116 cells
and CSC’s, of which the explanation remains unclear. LGR5 expression obviously is much more
reduced in colorectal cancer stem cells, which suggests that cancer stemness is reduced in CSC’s.
This should be confirmed by measuring stemness properties such as sphere formation.
21
Conclusion In this study, we assessed whether the phytochemicals Cucurbitacin B, E ,I and
Demethoxycurcumin are inhibitors of the Wnt signaling pathway in colorectal cancer stem cells.
Because of chemoresistance in cancer stem cells, new therapeutic approaches have to be
identified to improve the prognosis of patients suffering from colorectal cancer. The data we
found suggest that Cucurbitacin B and Demethoxycurcumin inhibit the Wnt signaling pathway.
Cucurbitacin E potentially is inhibiting Wnt pathway as well, though it is less potent than
Cucurbitacin B and Demethoxycurcumin. More studies should be performed to determine
whether these two Wnt-inhibiting agents have significant higher cytotoxicity in colorectal cancer
stem cells than classic cytostatic agents, but are less toxic to normal cells, in other words have a
larger therapeutic window. Furthermore, further research focused on synergetic interactions
between Cucurbitacin B or Demethoxycurcumin and 5-fluorouracil can provide some insights in
the possibility and benefits of combination drug treatment of these two agents.
22
References 1 Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2013; 63:11.
2 Lemmens VEPP, Coebergh JWW. Epidemiologie van colorectale tumoren. IKR Bulletin 2006; 30
(12):4-7.
3 Dennis J Ahnen; ‘Colorectal cancer: Epidemiology, risk factors, and protective factors’ .
http://www.uptodate.com/contents/colorectal-cancer-epidemiology-risk-factors-and-protective-factors .
(accessed on 14th May 2013)
4 Miguel A Rodriquez-Bigas cs,’Overview of the management of primary colon cancer’ .
http://www.uptodate.com/contents/overview-of-the-management-of-primary-colon-cancer. (accessed on
14th of May 2013)
5 Moertel CG, Fleming TR, Macdonald JS, Haller DG, Laurie JA, Goodman PJ, et al. Levamisole and
fluorouracil for adjuvant therapy of resected colon carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 1990 Feb 8;322(6):352-8.
6 Kjeldsen BJ, Kronborg O, Fenger C, Jørgensen OD. The pattern of recurrent colorectal cancer in a
prospective randomised study and the characteristics of diagnostic tests. Int J Colorectal Dis 1997;
12:329.
7 Kellie S Rath, ‘Safe and targeted anticancer therapy for ovarian cancer using a novel class of curcumin
analogs’. J Ovarian Res. 2013 May 11;6(1):35.
8 Saltz LB, Douillard JY, Pirotta N, et al . Irinotecan plus fluorouracil/leucovorin for metastatic colorectal
cancer: A new survival standard. The Oncologist 2001;6:81-91.
9 Kristel Kemper, Pramudita A Prasetyanti, Wim de Lau, Hans Rodermond, Hans Clevers, Jan Paul
Medema; ‘Monoclonal Antibodies Against Lgr5 Identify Human Colorectal Cancer Stem Cells’. Stem
Cells 2012; 30:2378-2386.
10 Hallett RM, Kondratyev MK, Giacomelli AO, Nixon AML, Girgis-Gabardo A, et al. Small Molecule
Antagonists of the Wnt/Beta-Catenin Signaling Pathway Target Breast Tumor-Initiating Cells in a
Her2/Neu Mouse Model of Breast Cancer. PLoS ONE 7(3): e33976.
11
Puglisi MA, et al. ‘Colon cancer stem cells: Controversies and perspectives’. World J Gastroenterol.
May 28, 2013 19(20): 2997–3006.
12 Baumann M, Krause M, Hill R Exploring the role of cancer stem cells in radioresistance. Nat Rev
Cancer 8: 545–554.
13Chabner BA, Roberts TG, Jr. Timeline: Chemotherapy and the war on cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 5: 65–
72.
14
Stein U, et al. . Intervening in b-catenin signaling by sulindac inhibits S100A4-dependent colon cancer
metastasis. Neoplasia, Feb 2011. 13(2): 131–144.
23
15 Kuhnert F, Davis CR, Wang HT, Chu P, Lee M, Yuan J, Nusse R, Kuo CJ. Essential requirement for
Wnt signaling in proliferation of adult small intestine and colon revealed by adenoviral expression of
Dickkopf-1. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2004; 101(1)
16 Pinto D, Gregorieff A, Begthel H, Clevers H. Canonical Wnt signals are essential for homeostasis of
the intestinal epithelium. Genes Dev. 2003;17:1709–1713.
17 Andrea Haegebarth, Hans Clevers; ‘Wnt Signaling and Lgr5 in Stem Cells’. AJP March 2009, Vol.
174 (3): 715-721.
18 Dakeng S et al. Inhibition of Wnt siganaling by cucurbitacin B in breast cancer cells: Reduction of Wnt
associated proteins and reduced translocation of galectin-3-mediated b-catenin to the nucleus. J Cell
Biochem. 2012 January, 113(1): 49-60.
19
Christopher A Scannell, ‘LGR5 is expressed by Ewing sarcoma and potentiates Wnt/b-catenin
signaling’ . Oncol., 15 April 2013. 3:81
20
Hsu HC, et al. (2013). Overexpression of Lgr5 correlates with resistance to 5-FU-based chemotherapy
in colorectal cancer. International Journal of Colorectal Disease, Nov 2013, Volume 28(11) :1535-1546
21
Christopher A Scannell, ‘LGR5 is expressed by Ewing sarcoma and potentiates Wnt/b-catenin
signaling’ . Oncol., 15 April 2013. 3:81
22 Metcalfe C, et al. Inhibition of GSK3 by Wnt signalling--two contrasting models. J Cell Sci. 2011 Nov
1;124(Pt 21):3537-44 23
ThermoScientific, Cellomics Beta-Catenin Activation Kits.
http://www.thermoscientific.fr/eThermo/CMA/PDFs/Product/productPDF_59314.PDF (accessed on 15-
04-2014)
24
Thermo Fisher Scientific , Hoechst 33342 Fluorescent Stain ,
http://www.piercenet.com/product/hoechst-33342-fluorescent-stain (accessed on 13-04-2014)
25
De Angelis PM . et al . Molecular characterizations of derivatives of HCT116 colorectal cancer cells
that are resistant to the chemotherapeutic agent 5-fluorouracil. Int J Oncology. 2004; Volume 24, Issue 5,
Pages 1279-1288.
26 Shakibaei, M, et al. Curcumin Enhances the Effect of Chemotherapy against Colorectal Cancer Cells by
Inhibition of NF-κB and Src Protein Kinase Signaling Pathways. PLoS One. 2013;8(2)
2727
Jiang G. et al. Targeting beta-Catenin signaling to induce apoptosis in human breast cancer cells by z-
Guggulsterone and Gugulipid extract of Ayurvedic medicine plant Commiphora mukul. BMC
Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2013, 13:203
28
Hsu, HC. et al. (2013) Overexpression of LGR5 correlates with resistance to 5-FU-based chemotherapy
in colorectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis (2013) 28: 1535-1546
29
Wu, C. et al. (2014). RSPO2-LGR5 signaling had tumor-suppressive activity in colorectal cancer.
Nature communications issue 5, Article number 3149, 30 january 2014
24
30
Manal R.A. Al-Kharusi, et al. LGR5 promotes survival in human colorectal adenoma cells and is
upregulated by PGE2: implications for targeting adenoma stem cells with NSAIDs.
2013. Carcinogenesis (2013) 2013 May;34(5):1150-7
31 Sandur SK, et al. Curcumin, demethoxycurcumin, bisdemethoxycurcumin, tetrahydrocurcumin and
turmerones differentially regulate anti-inflammatory and anti-proliferative responses through a ROS-
independent mechanism. Carcinogenesis. 2007 Aug;28(8):1765-73
32
Richichi C et al. Marker-independent Method for Isolating Slow-Dividing Cancer Stem Cells in Human
Glioblastoma. Neoplasia. Jul 2013; 15(7): 840–847.
33
Ring, JE et al. The Cancer Stem Cell-Targeting Wnt Inhibitor VS-507 Reduces Breast Cancer Growth
and Metastasis. Cancer Research: December 15, 2012; Volume 72, Issue 24, Supplement 3
34
Kobayashi S, et al. LGR5-Positive Colon Cancer Stem Cells Interconvert with Drug-Resistant LGR5-
Negative cells and are Capable of Tumor Reconstitution. Stem cells. 2012. Volume 30(12): 2631-2644.
35
Hsu, HS et al . Cucurbitacin I inhibits tumorigenic ability and enhances radiochemosensitivity in
nonsmall cell lung cancer-derived CD133-positive cells. Cancer. 2011; Volume 117(13): 2970-2985.
36
Chen, YW. Et al . Cucurbitacin I Suppressed Stem-Like Property and Enhanced Radiation-Induced
Apoptosis in Head and Neck Squamous Carcinoma–Derived CD44+ALDH1
+ Cells. Mol Cancer
Ther November 2010 9;2879
37 Liu, T. et al. Cucurbitacin B, a small molecule inhibitor of the Stat3 signaling pathway, enhances the
chemosensitivity of laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma cells to cisplatin. Eur J Pharmacol. 2010 Sep
1;641(1):15-22
38
Chauhan DP et al. Chemotherapeutic potential of curcumin for colorectal cancer. Curr Pharm Des 8:
1695–1706.
39
Shakibaei, M, et al. Curcumin Enhances the Effect of Chemotherapy against Colorectal Cancer Cells by
Inhibition of NF-κB and Src Protein Kinase Signaling Pathways. PLoS One. 2013;8(2)
40
Widakowich, C. et al. Review: Side effects of approved molecular targeted therapies in solid cancers.
The Oncologist, Dec 2007, Volume 12(12)1443-1455
41
Iwanski, GB. et al. Cucurbitacin B, a novel potentiator of gemcitabine with low toxicity in the treatment
of pancreatic cancer. Br J Pharmacol Jun 2010; 160(4): 998-1007
42
Dakeng, S. et al (2012). Inhibition of Wnt signaling by cucurbitacin B in breast cancer cells: Reduction
of Wnt associated proteins and reduced translocation of galectin-3-mediated b-catenin to the nucleus. J
Cell Biochem. 2012 January, 113(1): 49-60.
43
Iwanski, GB. et al (2010). Cucurbitacin B, a novel potentiator of gemcitabine with low toxicity in the
treatment of pancreatic cancer. Br J Pharmacol Jun 2010; 160(4): 998-1007
25
44
Chen, C et al . c-Myc enhances colon cancer cell-mediated angiogenesis through the regulation of HIF-
1α. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2013 Jan 11;430(2):505-11
45
Langenfeld J, et al . Posttranslational regulation of cyclin D1 by retinoic acid: a chemoprevention
mechanism. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997, 94(22):12070-12074
46
Lee DH et al. Cucurbitacin: Ancient compound shedding new light on cancer treatment.
heScientificWorldJOURNAL (2010) 10, 413–418
47
Huang TY et al. Demethoxycurcumin Retards Cell Growth and Induces Apoptosis in Human Brain
Malignant Glioma GBM 8401 Cells. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 396573, 11 pages
26
Appendix
Figure IA. Cucurbitacin B in cell line HCT116
Figure IB. Cucurbitacin E in cell line HCT116
27
Figure IC. Cucurbitacin I in cell line HCT116
Figure ID. Cucurbitacin B in colorectal cancer stem cells
28
Figure IE. Cucurbitacin E in colorectal cancer stem cells
Figure IF. Cucurbitacin I in colorectal cancer stem cells