Blackberry, Black Raspberry, Blueberry, Cranberry, Red Raspberry, and Strawberry Extracts Inhibit Growth and Stimulate Apoptosis of Human Cancer Cells In Vitro

Center for Human Nutrition, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry (Impact Factor: 2.91). 01/2007; 54(25):9329-39. DOI: 10.1021/jf061750g
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Berry fruits are widely consumed in our diet and have attracted much attention due to their potential human health benefits. Berries contain a diverse range of phytochemicals with biological properties such as antioxidant, anticancer, anti-neurodegerative, and anti-inflammatory activities. In the current study, extracts of six popularly consumed berries--blackberry, black raspberry, blueberry, cranberry, red raspberry and strawberry--were evaluated for their phenolic constituents using high performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet (HPLC-UV) and electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (LC-ESI-MS) detection. The major classes of berry phenolics were anthocyanins, flavonols, flavanols, ellagitannins, gallotannins, proanthocyanidins, and phenolic acids. The berry extracts were evaluated for their ability to inhibit the growth of human oral (KB, CAL-27), breast (MCF-7), colon (HT-29, HCT116), and prostate (LNCaP) tumor cell lines at concentrations ranging from 25 to 200 micro g/mL. With increasing concentration of berry extract, increasing inhibition of cell proliferation in all of the cell lines were observed, with different degrees of potency between cell lines. The berry extracts were also evaluated for their ability to stimulate apoptosis of the COX-2 expressing colon cancer cell line, HT-29. Black raspberry and strawberry extracts showed the most significant pro-apoptotic effects against this cell line. The data provided by the current study and from other laboratories warrants further investigation into the chemopreventive and chemotherapeutic effects of berries using in vivo models.

55 Reads
  • Source
    • "Plums extracts could contribute to the inhibition of proliferation of cancer cells; flavonoid and procyanidins fractions and in a less extent phenolic and anthocyanins fractions inhibited the proliferation of breast cancer cell line up to 50% (Olsson et al., 2004). Among the mechanisms proposed, this class of phytochemicals seemed to have pro-apoptotic effects against colon cancer cell lines (Seeram et al., 2006). On the other side, grape peels represent one of the most important food by-product, since grapes are the second world's largest fruit crop (almost 70 millions of tons produced in 2012), of which 70% is used for wine production (FAO, 2012). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract The industrial use of fruits for the production of juices results in the accumulation of large amounts of by-products such as peels, with are still a good source of phytochemicals such as phenols and anthocyanins. In this work, the impact of two different processing configuration of pulsed electric fields (PEF-I and PEF-II in continuous, with 25 mm and 7 mm of treatment chamber diameter, respectively) and ultrasonication (US25 and US50 in batch, at 25 and 50 °C, respectively) were evaluated in order to assess these technologies as environmental friendly alternatives to water extraction at 70 °C (WE70) in plum and grape peels. US was able to increase the extraction of anthocyanins and flavonoids in plum peels, being less effective than PEF with total phenols. In grape peels, when US was performed at higher temperature (US50), the yields were significantly higher. PEF was more successful when the diameter of the chamber was larger (PEF-I), and consequently the residence time and number of pulses greater. Particularly, PEF allowed to augment several folds the extraction of anthocyanins and flavonoids from grape peels, but was deleterious for ascorbic acid. Principal component analysis (PCA) showed that US50 and PEF-I were clustered and positively correlated with bioactive compounds recovery and antioxidant capacity.
    Journal of Food Engineering 12/2015; 166:268 - 275. DOI:10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2015.06.012 · 2.77 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Blackberries (Rubus spp., Rosaceae) have been appreciated by consumers, not only for their high nutritional value, but also for their benefits to physical and mental health (Ivanovic et al., 2014; Tavares et al., 2012). Besides high contents of fibers, vitamins, and essential minerals , blackberry is an important source of phenolic compounds, such as phenolic acids, tannins, elagitannins, flavonoids and anthocyanins (Elisia, Hu, Popovich, & Kitts, 2007; Hager, Howard, Liyanage, Lay, & Prior, 2008; Kaume, Howard, & Devareddy, 2011; Seeram et al., 2006). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Extracts with antioxidant compounds were obtained from residues of blackberries (Rubus fruticosus L.) through pressurized liquid extraction (PLE). The influence of solvent type (water, acidified water pH = 2.5, ethanol and ethanol + water 50% v:v) and temperature (60, 80 and 100 °C) on global yield (X0), total phenolics (TP), monomeric anthocyanins (MA) and antioxidant activity (AA) (by DPPH and ABTS) of the extracts was evaluated. Moreover, anthocyanins were identified and quantified by UHPLC-QToF-MS e UHPLC-UV-Vis, respectively. The best PLE condition was compared to conventional extractions (Soxhlet and maceration). Results showed positive influence of temperature on global yield, TP and AA. Ethanol + water as solvent at 100 °C was chosen as the best PLE condition, providing TP = 7.36 mgGAE/g fresh residue, MA = 1.02 mg C3GE/g fresh residue, AA = 76.03 μmol TE/g fresh residue and X0 = 6.33%. Excepting MA, all other results were over those of conventional extractions. Four anthocyanins were identified by UHPLC in the extracts, and their higher yields were achieved with acidified water as solvent at 60 and 80 °C. PLE has proved to be a promising alternative to recover bioactive compounds from blackberry residues, as well as other food by-products.
    Food Research International 01/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.foodres.2014.12.042 · 2.82 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "However, the differences may be attributed to the size of the fruits (Prior et al., 1998), because many studies demonstrated that smaller fruits have a high concentration of anthocyanins, because they are more concentrated in the skin than the pulp (Gao & Mazza, 1994; Moyer et al., 2002) and because it can depend on the climactic conditions (Agati et al., 2012) and type of cultivation (Hakkinen & Torronen, 2000). Anthocyanins have been shown to have human health benefits in many studies, due to their anti-inflammatory (Krikorian et al., 2010), anticancer (Giusti & Jing, 2007; Seeram et al., 2006) and anti-mutagenic activities which are capable of blocking the metabolism of cancer cells and even kill them (Nile & Park, 2014; Smith et al., 2004). The antioxidant concentrations found in the hydrophilic extracts are shown in Table 3. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hydrophilic and lipophilic extracts of ten cultivars of Highbush and Rabbiteye Brazilian blueberries (Vaccinium corymbosum L. and Vacciniumashei Reade, respectively) that are used for commercial production were analysed for antioxidant activity by the FRAP, ORAC, ABTS and β-carotene–linoleate methods. Results were correlated to the amounts of carotenoids, total phenolics and anthocyanins. Brazilian blueberries had relatively high concentration of total phenolics (1622–3457 mg gallic acid equivalents per 100 g DW) and total anthocyanins (140–318 mg cyanidin-3-glucoside equivalents per 100 g DW), as well as being a good source of carotenoids. There was a higher positive correlation between the amounts of these compounds and the antioxidant activity of hydrophilic compared to lipophilic extracts. There were also significant differences in the level of bioactive compounds and antioxidant activities between different cultivars, production location and year of cultivation.
    Food Chemistry 12/2014; 164:81–88. DOI:10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.04.114 · 3.39 Impact Factor
Show more