colon cancer
Recently Published Documents





2022 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 696-699
Naveed Majd ◽  
Michael Simon ◽  
Raquel Wagman ◽  
Lyle Gesner

2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 665-672
Xiaojing Qin ◽  
Bowen Ding ◽  
Xueyan Zhang ◽  
Lan Wang ◽  
Qing Zhang ◽  

Objective: To discuss In Vitro and In Vivo the effects of curcumin on colon cancer. Material and Methods: SW620 cell and nude mice with tumor were respectively divided into 3 groups: NC, low, middle, high and 5-Fu groups. Measuring the cell activity by MTT, the cell cycle and cell apoptosis using flow cytometry and relative proteins by WB assay in cell experiment. Evaluating tumor volume and weight, cell apoptosis rate by TUNEL assay and relative proteins by Immunohistochemistry (IHC). Results: Compared with NC group, the SW620 cell activity was significantly depressed with cell apoptosis and G1 phase rates increasing and PI3K, AKT and P53 proteins expression were significantly differences in curcumin treated groups with dose-dependent by WB assay; In Vivo study, the tumor volume and size were significantly suppressed and positive cell number were significantly up-regulation in curcumin treated groups with dose-dependent, and PI3K, AKT and P53 proteins expression were significantly differences in curcumin treated groups with dose-dependent by IHC. Conclusions: Curcumin had anti-tumor effects to colon cancer via regulation PI3K/AKT/P53 pathway In Vivo and vitro study.

2023 ◽  
Vol 83 ◽  
A. Al Hargan ◽  
M. H. Daghestani ◽  
A. H. Harrath

Abstract Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a disease with high incidence worldwide. As of 2018, it is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the world. In Saudi Arabia, the incidence of this disease has been increasing in the younger population. Both genetic and lifestyle factors may have contributed to its increased incidence and pathogenesis. Monosodium glutamate (MSG) is a food flavor enhancer that can be found in many commercial foods, and it can sometimes be used as a substitute to table salt. MSG has been investigated for its possible genotoxicity, yielding controversial results. In the present study, the effect of MSG on cell viability and its effect on expression of APC, BECN1, and TP53 genes in SW620 and SW480 colon cancer cell lines were studied. TP53 is a tumor suppressor gene that functions in modifying DNA errors and/or inducing apoptosis of damaged cells, and both APC and BECN1 genes are involved in CRC and are of importance in cellular growth and metastasis. Cancer cell viability was analyzed using MTT assay, and the results showed a significant increase in the number of viable cells after 24 h of treatment with MSG with different concentrations (0.5, 1.0, 10, 50, and 100mM). Moreover, gene expression results showed a significant increase in the expression levels of APC and BECN1 under specified conditions in both cell lines; conversely, TP53 showed a significant decrease in expression in SW620 cells. Thus, it can be concluded that MSG possibly confers a pro-proliferative effect on CRC cells.

2022 ◽  
Vol 146 ◽  
pp. 112598
Dragica Bozic ◽  
Katarina Baralić ◽  
Katarina Živančević ◽  
Evica Antonijević Miljaković ◽  
Marijana Ćurčić ◽  

2022 ◽  
Vol 146 ◽  
pp. 112543
Emilie Bersuder ◽  
Chloe Terciolo ◽  
Mathilde Lechevrel ◽  
Elisabeth Martin ◽  
Celine Quesnelle ◽  

2022 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 1122-1130
Ling-Kang Meng ◽  
Dan Zhu ◽  
Yu Zhang ◽  
Yuan Fang ◽  
Wei-Zhen Liu ◽  

2022 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Julien A. M. Vos ◽  
Robin de Best ◽  
Laura A. M. Duineveld ◽  
Henk C. P. M. van Weert ◽  
Kristel M. van Asselt

Abstract Background With more patients in need of oncological care, there is a growing interest to transfer survivorship care from specialist to general practitioner (GP). The ongoing I CARE study was initiated in 2015 in the Netherlands to compare (usual) surgeon- to GP-led survivorship care, with or without access to a supporting eHealth application (Oncokompas). Methods Semi-structured interviews were held at two separate points in time (i.e. after 1- and 5-years of care) to explore GPs’ experiences with delivering this survivorship care intervention, and study its implementation into daily practice. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 17 GPs. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was used as a conceptual framework. Results Overall, delivering survivorship care was not deemed difficult and dealing with cancer repercussions was already considered part of a GPs’ work. Though GPs readily identified advantages for patients, caregivers and society, differences were seen in GPs’ commitment to the intervention and whether it felt right for them to be involved. Patients’ initiative with respect to planning, absence of symptoms and regular check-ups due to other chronic care were considered to facilitate the delivery of care. Prominent barriers included GPs’ lack of experience and routine, but also lack of clarity regarding roles and responsibilities for organising care. Need for a monitoring system was often mentioned to reduce the risk of non-compliance. GPs were reticent about a possible future transfer of survivorship care towards primary care due to increases in workload and financial constraints. GPs were not aware of their patients’ use of eHealth. Conclusions GPs’ opinions and beliefs about a possible future role in colon cancer survivorship care vary. Though GPs recognize potential benefit, there is no consensus about transferring survivorship care to primary care on a permanent basis. Barriers and facilitators to implementation highlight the importance of both personal and system level factors. Conditions are put forth relating to time, reorganisation of infrastructure, extra personnel and financial compensation. Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register; NTR4860. Registered on the 2nd of October 2014.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document