Evaluation of Rumex hastatus D. Don for cytotoxic potential against HeLa and NIH/3T3 cell lines: chemical characterization of chloroform fraction and identification of bioactive compounds.
Journal: 2017/January - BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
ISSN: 1472-6882
Abstract:
BACKGROUND
The importance of Rumex genus and the renowned ethnopharmacological and biological potentials of Rumex hastatus is evident from the previous reports. Recently the R. hastatus has been evaluated for anticancer potential against HepG2, MCF7 or LNCaP cell lines with considerable cytotoxicity. We also reported the anti-tumor and anti-angiogenic potentials of R. hastatus. The current study has been arranged to evaluate cytotoxic potential of this plant against HeLa and NIH/3T3 cell lines and sort out the most active fraction of R. hastatus along with the identification of bioactive compounds responsible for cytotoxicity.
METHODS
The cytotoxic potential of methanolic extract and sub-fractions of R. hastatus was performed following (3-[4, 5-dimethylthiazole-2-yl]-2, 5-diphenyl-tetrazolium bromide) MTT calorimetric assay. Four concentrations (500, 250, 125 and 62.5 μg/ml) of each sample were used against both cell lines. Two cell lines i.e. HeLa and NIH/3T3 were used in the assay. Furthermore, chemical characterization of chloroform fraction was performed by GC-MS analysis.
RESULTS
The current investigational study demonstrates that all the solvent fractions of R. hastatus were active against HeLa and NIH/3T3 cell lines. Among all the fractions, chloroform fraction was dominant in activity against both cell lines. The observed IC50 values of chloroform fraction were 151.52 and 53.37 μg/ml against HeLa and NIH/3T3 respectively. The GC-MS analysis of chloroform fraction revealed the identification of 78 compounds with the identification of bioactive ones like ar-tumerone, phytol, dihydrojasmone, sitostenone etc.
CONCLUSIONS
It can be concluded from our results that Rumex hastatus D. Don possess strong cytotoxic potential. Moreover, the observed IC50 values and GC-MS analysis of chloroform fraction reveal that most of the bioactive compounds are in chloroform fraction. It can be further deduce that the chloroform fraction is a suitable target for the isolation of compounds having potential role in cancer therapy.
Relations:
Content
Citations
(6)
References
(34)
Drugs
(1)
Chemicals
(3)
Organisms
(4)
Anatomy
(2)
Affiliates
(2)
Similar articles
Articles by the same authors
Discussion board
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Dec/31/2015; 16(1)
Published online Aug/23/2016

Evaluation of Rumex hastatus D. Don for cytotoxic potential against HeLa and NIH/3T3 cell lines: chemical characterization of chloroform fraction and identification of bioactive compounds

Abstract

Background

The importance of Rumex genus and the renowned ethnopharmacological and biological potentials of Rumex hastatus is evident from the previous reports. Recently the R. hastatus has been evaluated for anticancer potential against HepG2, MCF7 or LNCaP cell lines with considerable cytotoxicity. We also reported the anti-tumor and anti-angiogenic potentials of R. hastatus. The current study has been arranged to evaluate cytotoxic potential of this plant against HeLa and NIH/3T3 cell lines and sort out the most active fraction of R. hastatus along with the identification of bioactive compounds responsible for cytotoxicity.

Methods

The cytotoxic potential of methanolic extract and sub-fractions of R. hastatus was performed following (3-[4, 5-dimethylthiazole-2-yl]-2, 5-diphenyl-tetrazolium bromide) MTT calorimetric assay. Four concentrations (500, 250, 125 and 62.5 μg/ml) of each sample were used against both cell lines. Two cell lines i.e. HeLa and NIH/3T3 were used in the assay. Furthermore, chemical characterization of chloroform fraction was performed by GC-MS analysis.

Results

The current investigational study demonstrates that all the solvent fractions of R. hastatus were active against HeLa and NIH/3T3 cell lines. Among all the fractions, chloroform fraction was dominant in activity against both cell lines. The observed IC50 values of chloroform fraction were 151.52 and 53.37 μg/ml against HeLa and NIH/3T3 respectively. The GC-MS analysis of chloroform fraction revealed the identification of 78 compounds with the identification of bioactive ones like ar-tumerone, phytol, dihydrojasmone, sitostenone etc.

Conclusion

It can be concluded from our results that Rumex hastatus D. Don possess strong cytotoxic potential. Moreover, the observed IC50 values and GC-MS analysis of chloroform fraction reveal that most of the bioactive compounds are in chloroform fraction. It can be further deduce that the chloroform fraction is a suitable target for the isolation of compounds having potential role in cancer therapy.

Background

The leading research teams around the world are in continuous struggle to explore novel aspects to facilitate life. The facilitation of life also encompasses decreased morbidity and mortality [1]. One of leading causes of mortality is cancer worldwide which is considered as the most challenging disease. Several factors have been reported which cause cancer and hyper proliferative conditions [2]. The free radicals induced lesions have been considered as one of the leading causes of cancer [3]. Attention of the advanced clinical investigators has been focused on the therapeutic measures of this disease. Various therapeutic strategies are followed for the treatment of cancer and chemotherapy has been considered as the most acceptable and positive prognostic therapeutic approach [4]. The drugs from natural sources being biodegradable are preferred over the synthetic ones due to their comparative safe and efficacious nature [5]. Several natural anticancer drugs are available in the market like etoposide, docetaxel, irinotecan, pacletaxel, topotecan, vincristine and vinblastine [6]. Various derivatives of natural anticancer drugs are also being synthesized and exploited against cancer [7]. The exploration of anticancer agent is not confined to the laboratory rather their availability is also evidenced in plants, marine animals, bacteria, algae, fungi, reptiles etc [8, 9]. The most feasible and economic source of anticancer agents is plants. Numerous anticancer compounds have been isolated from plants and various investigators have reported plethora of plants’ secondary metabolites with strong anticancer potentials [10]. Several families of plants have been reported to possess anticancer compounds. One of the plants’ families i.e., Polygonaceae is also famous for anticancer activities [11]. Rumex is one of the most important genera of this family and several species of this genus have been reported to possess strong anticancer potentials [12]. Several antitumor compounds have also been isolated from different species of this genus, for example, Rumex hymenosepalus has been reported with the isolation of antitumor compounds, i.e. leucodelphinidin and leucopelargonidin [13]. Several species of Rumex have been employed ethnomedicinally in the treatment of inflammation, swelling, hyper proliferative skin diseases [14].

Rumex hastatus is one of the most important species which has been used traditionally for the treatment of various ailments like rheumatism, tonsillitis, piles etc [1517]. Previously, the R. hastatus has been evaluated for anticancer potential against HepG2, MCF7 or LNCaP cell lines with considerable cytotoxicity [18]. Previously, R. hastatus has been evaluated for anticholinesterase, antioxidant, anti-tumor, anti-angiogenic, phytotoxic and antibacterial potentials [1922]. Based on the ethnomedicinal uses and literature review of R. hastatus, the current study was designed to explore cytotoxic potential of this plant against cell lines and to find out the bioactive phytoconstituents responsible for anticancer activity using GC-MS analysis.

Methods

Plant collection, extraction and fractionation

The aerial parts of mature plant of R. hastatus were collected from the surrounding area of University of Malakand, Pakistan. The plant’s name was confirmed by Dr. Ali Hazrat, Plant Taxonomist, Department of Botany, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University, Sheringal Dir (U), KPK, Pakistan, and deposited with voucher specimen No. 1015SA. The plant’s material was shade dried, powdered and subjected to maceration process. Afterwards, it was filtered and the filtrate was evaporated under reduced pressure using rotary evaporator at 40 °C [23, 24]. Similarly, the crude methanolic extract (Rh.Cr) was obtained weighing 400 g (5.7 %). The suspension of Rh.Cr weighing 300 g was subjected to fractionation process with the order of increasing polarity. In this way, the fractions obtained were 19 (6.3 %), 21 (7 %), 29 (9.6 %) and 120 (40 %) g of n-hexane (Rh.Hex), chloroform (Rh.Chf), ethyl acetate (Rh.EtAc) and aqueous fraction (Rh.Aq) respectively [25, 26].

Gas Chromatography (GC) analysis

Samples were subjected to GC analysis using an Agilent USB-393752 gas chromatograph (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA, USA) with HHP-5MS 5 % phenylmethylsiloxane capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm × 0.25 μm film thickness; Restek, Bellefonte, PA) equipped with an FID detector. The initial temperature of the oven was retain at 70 °C for 1 min, followed by increase at the rate of 6 °C/min to 180 °C for 5 min and finally at the rate of 5 °C/min to 280 °C for 20 min. The temperature of injector and detector were set at 220 and 290 °C, correspondingly. Helium was used as carrier gas at a flow rate of 1 ml/min, and diluted samples (1/1000 in n-pentane, v/v) of 1.0 μl were injected manually in the splitless mode.

Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) analysis

GC/MS analysis of samples were processed using an Agilent USB-393752 gas chromatograph (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA, USA) with a HHP-5MS 5 % phenylmethylsiloxane capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm × 0.25 μm film thickness; Restek, Bellefonte, PA) outfitted with an Agilent HP-5973 mass selective detector in the electron impact mode (Ionization energy: 70 eV) working under the same experimental conditions as described for GC.

Identification of components

Compounds were recognized by comparison of their retention times with those of authentic compounds in the literature under the same set of conditions. Further identification were done through the spectral data obtained from the Wiley and NIST libraries and further confirmed by comparisons of the fragmentation pattern of the mass spectra with data published in the literature [27, 28].

MTT assay on HeLa and NIH/3T3 cell lines

Cytotoxic activity of various samples of R. hastatus was assayed in 96-well flat-bottomed micro plates following the standard MTT (3-[4, 5-dimethylthiazole-2-yl]-2, 5-diphenyl-tetrazolium bromide) colorimetric assay [29]. Briefly, HeLa cells (Cervical Cancer) and Mouse embryonic fibroblast NIH/3T3 cell lines were cultured in Minimum Essential Medium Eagle. The media was supplemented with 5 % of fetal bovine serum (FBS), 100 μg/ml of streptomycin and 100 IU/ml of penicillin in 75 cm2 flasks and incubated in 5 % CO2 incubator at 37 °C. Growing cells were harvested exponentially and counted with haemocytometer followed by dilution with a particular medium. Cell culture was prepared having the concentration of 6 x 104 cells/ml and transferred (100 μl/well) into 96-well plates. After overnight incubation, medium was discarded and 200 μl of fresh medium was added with various concentrations of plant samples (1–30 μM). After 48 h, 200 μl MTT (0.5 mg/ml) was added to each well and incubated additionally for 4 h. Afterward, 100 μL of DMSO was added to each well. The extent of MTT reduction to formazan within cells was figured out by measuring the absorbance at 570 nm, employing a micro plate reader (Spectra Max plus, Molecular Devices, CA, USA). The samples causing 50 % growth inhibition for both cell lines were recorded as IC50. The percent inhibition was calculated by the formula given below;\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$ \%\ \mathrm{Inhibition} = 100-\frac{\mathrm{Mean}\ \mathrm{O}\mathrm{D}\ \mathrm{of}\ \mathrm{test}\ \mathrm{sample}-\mathrm{Mean}\ \mathrm{O}\mathrm{D}\ \mathrm{of}\ \mathrm{negative}\ \mathrm{control}}{\mathrm{Mean}\ \mathrm{O}\mathrm{D}\ \mathrm{of}\ \mathrm{positive}\ \mathrm{control}-\mathrm{Mean}\ \mathrm{O}\mathrm{D}\ \mathrm{of}\ \mathrm{negative}\ \mathrm{control}} \times 100 $$\end{document}%Inhibition=100MeanODoftestsampleMeanODofnegativecontrolMeanODofpositivecontrolMeanODofnegativecontrol×100

The results i.e., Percent inhibition were processed via Soft- Max Pro software (Molecular Device, USA).

Statistical analysis

All the tests were performed in triplicate and values were expressed as means ± S.E.M. Multiple group comparison was performed by Two way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni post test in which the P < 0.05 were considered significant.

Results

MTT assays

The MTT assay was carried out against two types of cell lines, i.e., HeLa and NIH/3T3. The crude methanolic extract and sub-fractions of R. hastatus were assay against both cell lines. All the samples were found active against both cell lines with chloroform fraction more dominant as shown in Table 1. In HeLa cell line cytotoxicity assay, the chloroform fraction revealed significant cytotoxic potential. The observed cytotoxic potential against HeLe cell line were 81.50 ± 0.86, 69.00 ± 2.80, 43.66 ± 0.89 and 34.22 ± 0.23 % at concentrations of 500, 250, 125 and 62.5 μg/ml respectively with IC50 value of 151.52 μg/ml. Similarly, the second highest activity has been demonstrated by ethyl acetate fraction i.e., 79.66 ± 0.89, 66.32 ± 1.30, 40.93 ± 0.49 and 29.83 ± 1.36 % cytotoxic activity at concentrations of 500, 250, 125 and 62.5 μg/ml against HeLa cell line with IC50 value of 166.50 μg/ml. The methanolic extract and aqueous fraction demonstrated moderate cytotoxic potentials with IC50 values of 347.33 and 369.68 μg/ml respectively. Among all the samples of R. hastatus, the least activity was shown by that of n-hexane fraction with IC50 of 572.61 μg/ml.

Table 1

Cytotoxic activity of various samples of Rumex hastatus against HeLa and NIH/3T3 cell lines

SamplesConc. (μg/ml)HeLa Cell LineNIH/3T3 Cell Line
Inhibition (%)IC50 (μg/ml)Inhibition (%)IC50 (μg/ml)
Rh.Cr50063.25 ± 0.20***347.3374.96 ± 0.21***174.52
25041.43 ± 1.15***59.46 ± 0.54***
12529.00 ± 1.50***43.07 ± 1.02***
62.520.64 ± 1.60***35.53 ± 0.61***
Rh.Hex50036.33 ± 3.50***572.6153.86 ± 0.85***439.26
25015.46 ± 2.43***40.60 ± 0.41***
12507.33 ± 0.68***28.33 ± 0.33***
62.505.03 ± 0.23***21.50 ± 0.60***
Rh.Chf50081.50 ± 0.86***151.5282.13 ± 0.88***53.37
25069.00 ± 2.80***70.66 ± 0.49***
12543.66 ± 0.89***64.02 ± 1.11***
62.534.22 ± 0.23***51.43 ± 0.61***
Rh.EtAc50079.66 ± 0.89***166.5072.76 ± 0.78***158.73
25066.32 ± 1.30***59.00 ± 0.57***
12540.93 ± 0.49***46.86 ± 0.85***
62.529.83 ± 1.36***31.43 ± 0.81***
Rh.Aq50060.83 ± 1.36***369.6865.60 ± 0.41***237.62
25042.53 ± 0.46***51.96 ± 0.21***
12533.61 ± 1.70***42.66 ± 0.49***
62.521.33 ± 0.33***36.13 ± 0.88***
Doxorubicin50096.63 ± 1.67<0.198.53 ± 1.09<0.1
25091.87 ± 0.2593.76 ± 0.78
12589.46 ± 2.4390.33 ± 0.88
62.584.50 ± 0.8687.46 ± 0.54

Data is represented as mean ± S.E.M; n = 3, ***: P < 0.001

Key: Rh.Cr Crude methanolic extract, Rh.Hex n-hexane fraction, Rh.Chf chloroform fraction, Rh.EtAc ethyl acetate fraction, Rh.Aq aqueous fraction

In NIH/3T3 cell line assay, again the chloroform fraction was found dominant exhibiting 82.13 ± 0.88, 70.66 ± 0.49, 64.02 ± 1.11 and 51.43 ± 0.61 % cytotoxic potential at concentrations of 500, 250, 125 and 62.5 μg/ml with IC50 value of 53.37 μg/ml. Similarly, the ethyl acetate fraction revealed the second highest activity against NIH/3T3 cell line i.e., 72.76 ± 0.78, 59.00 ± 0.57, 46.86 ± 0.85 and 31.43 ± 0.81 % at concentrations of 500, 250, 125 and 62.5 μg/ml with IC50 value of 158.73 μg/ml. The IC50 calculated for the rest of the samples were 174.52, 237.62 and 439.26 μg/ml for methanolic extract, aqueous and n-hexane fractions respectively. The cytotoxic potential of all the test samples of R. hastatus against NIH/3T3 cell line has been summarized in Table 1. The standard drug doxorubicin exhibited IC50 value <0.1 μg/ml against both cell lines.

GC-MS analysis

Based on the high potency in both cell lines assays, the chloroform fraction was subjected to GC-MS analysis. A total of 78 phytoconstituents were identified by the GC-MS analysis. The identified compounds contain important bioactive compounds responsible for the cytotoxic potential of the plant. The parameters of some compounds found in GC-MS analysis have been summarized in the Table 2.

Table 2

Parameters of various components in Chloroform fraction of Rumex hastatus

RT (min)HeightHeight %AreaArea %Area Sum %Base Peak m/zWidth
26.5775364697.5419165918.142.262220.144
28.4756E + 0687.452234853194.926.38880.204
31.9797E + 0691.912267563296.2926.7767.10.141
32.1067E + 061002355053310027.855.10.127
32.1733338154.694961772.110.5955.10.054
32.52590030812.66237037110.072.8880.107
34.9394676346.5812861925.461.522540.1
35.7663312994.668361223.550.99880.097
37.9773408284.797731683.280.911490.09
43.66785109711.97299499112.723.5443.20.134

It is evident that area wise the highest percentage has been exhibited by linoleic acid ethyl ester with retention time 31.979 (96.29 %) followed by hexadecanoic acid, ethyl ester with retention time 28.475 (94.9 %). A summary of all identified compounds in the chloroform fraction has been shown in Table 3.

Table 3

List of compounds in chloroform fraction of Rumex hastatus

S. NoCompound LabelRTCommon NameFormulaHits (DB)
1.Diethyl 2,2-Dihydroxy Sulfide5.757TedegylC4H10O2S3
2.Benzenemethanol6.438Benzyl alcoholC7H8O10
3.2-Pyrrolidinone, 1-methyl6.567M-PyrolC5H9NO10
4.4H-Pyran-4-one, 2,3-dihydro-3,5-dihydroxy-6-methyl-8.793NFC6H8O410
5.Benzoic acid, ammonium salt9.343Ammonium benzoateC7H6O210
6.2-Methoxy-4-vinylphenol12.609p-VinylguaiacolC9H10O210
7.Trimethylsilyl cyanide15.284Trimethyl silyl nitrileC4H9NSi10
8.Bis(2-hydroxyethyl)lauramide17.708lauramideC16H33NO310
9.Dodecanoic acid, ethyl ester18.281Ethyl dodecanoateC14H28O210
10.2-Cyclopenten-1-one, 3-methyl-2-pentyl18.547DihydrojasmoneC11H18O10
11.Ethyl.alpha.-d-glucopyranoside19.004glucopyranosideC8H16O610
12.Silane, [(1,1-dimethyl-2 propenyl)oxy] dimethyl-19.332NFC7H16OSi10
13.4-[1,5-Dimethyl-1,4-Hexadienyl]-1-Methyl-1-Cyclohexene19.582NFC15H2410
14.Ar-tumerone19.755Ar-tumeroneC15H20O10
15.4-((1E)-3-Hydroxy-1-propenyl)-2-methoxyphenol21.382NFC10H12O310
16.Tetradecanoic acid21.798Myristic acidC14H28O210
17.(-)-Loliolide or Loliolide22.21CalendinC11H16O310
18.Tetradecanoic acid, ethyl ester22.642Ethyl myristateC16H32O210
19.2-Cyclohexen-1-one, 4-hydroxy-3,5,6-trimethyl-4-(3-oxo-1-butenyl)22.779NFC13H18O310
20.p-Hydroxycinnamic acid, ethyl ester23.832p-Hydroxycinnamic acid, ethyl esterC11H12O310
21.7,11,15-Trimethyl,3-Methylene-1-Hexadecene24.028NeophytadieneC20H3810
22.2-Pentadecanone, 6,10,14-trimethyl24.223Hexahydrofarnesyl acetoneC18H36O10
23.Pentadecanoic acid, ethyl ester25.763ethyl pentadecanoateC17H34O210
24.Ethyl (2E)-3-(4-hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)-2-propenoate26.577NFC12H14O46
25.Hexadecanoic acid27.756Palmitic acidC16H32O210
26.Ethyl 9-Hexadecenoate27.899NFC18H34O210
27.1,9-Tetradecadiene28.273NFC14H2610
28.Hexadecanoic acid, ethyl ester28.475Ethyl palmitateC18H36O210
29.(E)-3-(4-Biphenylyl)-2-propen-1-ol28.518NFC15H14O8
30.Peniopholide29.798PeniopholideC15H24O310
31.Heptadecanoic acid, ethyl ester30.025Ethyl n-heptadecanoateC19H38O210
32.Propyl hexadecanoate30.527Propyl palmitateC19H38O210
33.Heptadecanoic acid, ethyl ester30.607Ethyl n-eptadecanoateC19H38O210
34.2-Hexadecen-1-ol, 3,7,11,15-tetramethyl-, [R-[R*,R*-(E)]]-31.016PhytolC20H40O10
35.cis-9,cis-12-Octadecadienoic acid31.507NFC18H32O210
36.E-11,13-Tetradecadien-1-ol31.616NFC14H26O10
37.Linoleic acid ethyl ester31.979MandenolC20H36O210
38.Ethyl 9-Octadecanoate32.104Ethyl 9-OctadecenoateC20H38O210
39.exo-4-Methylbicyclo[3.2.1]octan-3-ene32.121NFC9H1410
40.16-Methyloxacyclohexadeca-3,5-dien-2-one33.111NFC16H26O210
41.3.beta.-Hydroxydihydroconfertifolin33.956NFC15H24O31
42.Ethyl 9-Hexadecenoate34.021NFC18H34O210
43.Cis-8-methyl-exo-tricyclo[5.2.1.0(2.6)]decane34.647NFC11H1810
44.9,10-Anthracenedione, 1,8-dihydroxy-3-methyl34.942C.I. Natural Yellow 23C15H10O410
45.4,8,12-Trimethyltridecan-4-olide35.181NFC16H30O210
46.5-Icosyne35.3055-EicosyneC20H3810
47.Ethyl 9-Hexadecenoate35.382NFC18H34O210
48.Heptadecanoic acid, ethyl ester35.768NFC19H38O210
49.13-Tetradecenal35.985NFC14H26O10
50.5-Dodecyne36.0785-DodecyneC12H2210
51.N-Vanillylnonanoamide37.013NonivamideC17H27NO310
52.1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis (2 ethylhexyl) ester37.978DNOPC24H38O410
53.N(4-Hydroxy-3-Methoxybenzyl)-8-Methylnon-6-Enamide38.186NFC18H27NO310
54.delta.13-cis-Docosenoic acid38.242Erucic acidC22H42O210
55.N-(4-Hydroxy-3-Methoxybenzyl)-8-Methyl-Nonanamide38.489NFC18H29NO310
56.Docosanoic acid, ethyl ester38.566Ethyl docosanoateC24H48O210
57.9,10-Anthracenedione, 1,8-dihydroxy-3-methoxy-6-methyl39.322PhyscionC16H12O510
58.Methyl palustrate isomer39.554Methyl palustrateC21H32O21
59.1-Bromo-4,8,12-trimethyl-3(E),7(E)-11-tridecatriene40.642NFC16H27Br5
60.Oleic acid amide40.909OleamideC18H35NO10
61.Heptadecanoic acid, ethyl ester41.07NFC19H38O210
62.1,1-Di(1,1-dimethylethyl)cyclopropane41.672NFC11H223
63.Arachic alcohol41.685n-EicosanolC20H42O10
64.Aristol-9-en-8-one42.368AristoloneC15H22O10
65.2-Bromotetradecane42.397NFC14H29Br10
66.Stigmasta-5,22-dien-3-ol, acetate, (3.beta.,22Z)-42.529NFC31H50O210
67.Stigmast-5-en-3-ol, (3.beta.,24S)- (CAS)42.968ClionasterolC29H50O10
68.7-methyltocol43.226NFC27H46O22
69.Stigmast-5-en-3-ol, acetate, (3.beta.)-43.666β-Sitosterol acetateC31H52O210
70.alpha.-Tocopherol44.466Vitamin EC29H50O27
71.Cholesta-4,6-dien-3-ol, benzoate, (3.beta.)45.533NFC34H48O29
72.Alpha.-Bisabolol52.989.Alpha.-bisabololC18H32O10
73.Methyl Commate E53.773NFC31H50O510
74.Stigmast-4-en-3-one55.721SitostenoneC29H48O10
75.2-Ethylthio-2-ethoxy-3-oxo-N phenylbutanamide57.414NFC14H19NO3S9
76.3-(Methoxymethoxy)-5-(phenylmethoxypentanal58.739NFC14H20O41
77.13-Epimanool62.472Epimanool-C20H34O10
78.1,2-Dicyclohexyl-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane70.638NFC14H22F46

The GC-MS chromatogram of the chloroform fraction is shown in Fig. 1 in which some of the important peaks are clearly visible. Some important bioactive compounds which having a positive role in cytotoxicity are sorted in Fig. 2. Moreover, the integration patterns of some important compounds as elucidated by GC-MS are shown in Fig. 3.

Fig. 1

GC-MS chromatogram of chloroform fraction of Rumex hastatus

Fig. 2

Structures of some anticancer compounds identified in the GC-MS analysis of chloroform fraction of Rumex hastatus.a Phytol b Dihydrojasmone c Ethyl.alpha.-d-glucopyranoside d Anthracenedione e Nonivamide f Silane g Eicosanol h Aristolone i 2-Ethylthio-2-ethoxy-3-oxo-N-phenylbutanamide and j Sitostenone

Fig. 3

GC-MS spectra of some important compounds in chloroform fraction of Rumex hastatus

Discussion

HeLa is a type of immortal cell line obtained from cervical cancer cells and for the very first time this cell line has been taken from late Henrietta Lacks in 1951 and abbreviated for her name [30]. Similarly, the NIH/3T3 cell line was originated from swiss mice in 1962 which consists of immortal fibroblast cell and widely used for experimental purposes [31]. To figure out the cytotoxicity in these cells, the MTT assay is considered as a rapid and authentic procedure to appraise the cell viability and death by calorimetric analysis [29]. Previously, the MTT assay has been reported by numerous researchers to evaluate the cytotoxicity [32, 33]. Recently, Polygonum hydropiper has been demonstrated with significant cytotoxicity against NIH/3T3 cell line following MTT assay [34]. As this is evidenced from several reports that a specific pharmacological potential within plant species is basically conferred due to specific group of compounds [35]. Similarly, a specific group of phytoconstituents is responsible for the cytotoxic potential of certain plants [36]. The GC-MS is a quick and easy way of finding out various components in a crude mixture of plant extract [37]. In our current research, the GC-MS analysis of chloroform fraction of R. hastatus showed 78 compounds summarized in Table 2. Several compounds identified by GC-MS in the chloroform fraction are reported to have positive role in cell toxicities. For instance, phytol, dihydrojasmone, ethyl α-d-glucopyranoside, anthracenedione, silane, nonivamide, eicosanol, aristolone, ar-tumerone and sitostenone are the compounds with cytotoxic/anticancer potential demonstrated along with their spectra in Figs. 2 and 3.

Phytol present in R. hastatus has been reported to induce programmed cell death in human lymphoid leukemia Molt 4B cells [38]. Dihydrojasmone, one of the member of jasmonate family, which has been implied as a new family of anticancer agents [39]. Ethyl-α-d-glucopyranoside a derivative of glucopyranoside has been reported time and again to possess strong anticancer potential and it is evident from the GC-MS analysis that R. hastatus contain ethyl α-d-glucopyranoside, which may confer the possible anticancer potential to this plant. Anthracenedione has also been reported to possess anticancer properties [40]. Silane has been proven as an efficient agent in a nanoparticle based drug delivery system for anticancer compounds. The chloroform fraction of R. hastatus also possess nonivamide, which is skin permeation enhancer and used in various ointments etc [41]. Similarly, eicosanol is a C20 alcohol present in R. hastatus and C20 aliphatic alcohols has been employed in the treatment of hyperproliferative skin disordersone [42]. Aristolone and Ar-tumerone are sesquiterpenes, and the derivatives of sesquiterpene have been reported to possess the cytotoxic potential [43]. Likewise, vitamin E a phenolic compound with pronounced free radical scavenging and anticancer potential has also been evidenced from Table 2 [44, 45]. Another compound i.e., a natural steroid named sitostenone has also been analyzed in GC-MS spectra and steroids have also been used since long for the treatment of cancer, so this compound may also be involved in cytotoxicity observed in our current studies [46]. The current investigational study demonstrates that the chloroform fraction of R. hastatus was the most active one against two types of cell lines. The regression and correlation analysis shows that this plant has a parallel cytotoxic potential against both the cell lines as depicted in the Fig. 4 with r2 value of 0.881. The current study can also be correlated with the previous cytotoxic activity of R. hastatus against brine shrimps in which the chloroform fraction was the most active fraction [22]. Based on the marked potential of this fraction, it has been chemically characterized and based on the literature survey; the active compounds have been sorted out.

Fig. 4

Regression and correlation of various samples of Rumex hastatus against HeLa cell line Vs NIH/3T3 cell line

Conclusion

Based on our current results, we can conclude that Rumex hastatus is a potential source of cytotoxic compounds. Moreover, the chloroform fraction is the active one among other solvent fractions of R. hastatus. Based on the GC-MS analysis of chloroform fraction, we can conclude that the chloroform fraction of R. hastatus is a rich source of bioactive compounds responsible for cytotoxicity.

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Dr. Ali Hazrat, Department of Botany, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University, Sheringal Dir (U), KPK, Pakistan for the identification of plant.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Availability of data and materials

The data presented in this manuscript belong to the PhD work of Mr. Sajjad Ahmad and has not been deposited in any repository yet. However, the materials are available to the researchers upon request.

Authors’ contributions

SA and AZ carried out experimental work, data collection and literature search. FU designed the project and helped in supervision. MA and FU drafted the manuscript for publication. AS make the final version of publication. All the authors have read and approved the final manuscript for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Consent for publication

Not applicable for this submission.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable for this submission.

Abbreviations

eVElectron voltFBSFetal bovine serumFIDFlame ionization detectorGC-MSGas chromatography-mass spectrometryHeLaHuman cervical carcinoma cell line or Henrietta Lacks cell lineHepG2Human liver cancer cell line/Hepatoblastoma G2 cell lineIC50Median inhibitory concentrationLNCaPLymph node carcinoma of the prostateMTT3-[4, 5-dimethylthiazole-2-yl]-2, 5-diphenyl-tetrazolium bromideMCF7Breast cancer cell line/Michigan Cancer Foundation-7NIH/3T3

Fibroblast cell line from Swiss mouse embryo/3-day transfer, inoculum 3 x 105 cells

NISTNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyODOptical densityRh.AqAqueous fractionRh.ChfChloroform fractionRh.CrMethanolic extract of Rumex hastatusRh.EtAcEthyl acetate fractionRh.Hexn-hexane fractionSEMStandard error mean

References

  • 1. BirdSNoronhaMSinnottHAn integrated care facilitation model improves quality of life and reduces use of hospital resources by patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and chronic heart failureAust J Prim Health2010164326333[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 2. Borrego-SotoGOrtiz-LopezRRojas-MartinezAIonizing radiation-induced DNA injury and damage detection in patients with breast cancerGenet Mol Biol2015384420432[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 3. ValkoMRhodesCMoncolJIzakovicMMazurMFree radicals, metals and antioxidants in oxidative stress-induced cancerChem Biol Interact20061601140[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 4. MohamedAFGonzalezJMFairchildAPatient Benefit-Risk Tradeoffs for Radioactive Iodine-Refractory Differentiated Thyroid Cancer TreatmentsJ Thyroid Res20152015438235[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 5. CoatsJRRisks from natural versus synthetic insecticidesAnn Rev Entomol1994391489515[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 6. HaddadinSPerryMCHistory of small-cell lung cancerClin Lung Cancer20111228793[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 7. JordanMAWilsonLMicrotubules as a target for anticancer drugsNat Rev Cancer200444253265[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 8. SimmonsTLAndrianasoloEMcPhailKFlattPGerwickWHMarine natural products as anticancer drugsMol Cancer Ther200542333342[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 9. BermudesDZhengLKingILive bacteria as anticancer agents and tumor-selective protein delivery vectorsCurr Opin Drug Discov Develop200252194199[Google Scholar]
  • 10. CroteauRKutchanTMLewisNGNatural products (secondary metabolites)Biochem Mol Biol Plants20002412501319[Google Scholar]
  • 11. LajterIZupkóIMolnárJJakabGBaloghLVasasAHohmannJAntiproliferative activity of Polygonaceae species from the Carpathian Basin against human cancer cell linesPhytother Res20132717785[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 12. KueteVWaboHKEyongKOFeussiMTWienchBKruscheBTanePFolefocGNEfferthTAnticancer activities of six selected natural compounds of some Cameroonian medicinal plantsPLoS One201168e21762[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 13. ColeJRBuchalterLIsolation of a potential antitumor fraction from Rumex hymenosepalusJ Pharm Sci196554913761378[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 15. ShinwariZKGilaniSSSustainable harvest of medicinal plants at Bulashbar Nullah, Astore (Northern Pakistan)J Ethnopharmacol2003842289298[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 16. GorsiMSMirajSEthnomedicinal survey of plants of Khanabad village and its allied areas, district GilgitAsian J Plant Sci200215604615[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 17. MananZRazzaqAIslamMDiversity of medicinal plants in Wari subdivision district Upper Dir, PakistanPak J Plant Sci200745231234[Google Scholar]
  • 18. GhufranMAQureshiRABatoolAKondratyukTPGuilfordJMMarlerLEChangLCPezzutoJMEvaluation of selected indigenous medicinal plants from the western Himalayas for cytotoxicity and as potential cancer chemopreventive agentsPharm Biol2009476533538[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 19. AhmadSUllahFSadiqAAyazMImranMAliIZebAUllahFRaza ShahMChemical composition, antioxidant and anticholinesterase potentials of essential oil of Rumex hastatus D. Don collected from the North West of PakistanBMC Complement Altern Med20161619[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 20. AhmadSUllahFAyazMSadiqAImranMAntioxidant and anticholinesterase investigations of Rumex hastatus D. Don: potential effectiveness in oxidative stress and neurological disordersBiol Res20154818[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 21. AhmadSUllahFAyazMZebAUllahFSadiqAAntitumor and anti-angiogenic potentials of isolated crude saponins and various fractions of Rumex hastatus D. DonBiol Res20164911[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 22. KamalZUllahMAhmadSUllahFSadiqAAyazMZebAImranMEx-vivo antibacterial, phytotoxic and cytotoxic, potential in the crude natural phytoconstituents of Rumex hastatus D. DonPak J Bot201547SI293299[Google Scholar]
  • 23. ZebASadiqAUllahFAhmadSAyazMPhytochemical and toxicological investigations of crude methanolic extracts, subsequent fractions and crude saponins of Isodon rugosusBiol Res201447157[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 24. ZebASadiqAUllahFAhmadSAyazMInvestigations of anticholinestrase and antioxidant potentials of methanolic extract, subsequent fractions, crude saponins and flavonoids isolated from Isodon rugosusBiol Res2014471110[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 25. AyazMJunaidMAhmedJUllahFSadiqAAhmadSImranMPhenolic contents, antioxidant and anticholinesterase potentials of crude extract, subsequent fractions and crude saponins from Polygonum hydropiper LBMC Complement Altern Med2014141145[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 26. AyazMJunaidMSubhanFUllahFSadiqAAhmadSImranMKamalZHussainSShahSMHeavy metals analysis, phytochemical, phytotoxic and anthelmintic investigations of crude methanolic extract, subsequent fractions and crude saponins from Polygonum hydropiper LBMC Complement Altern Med2014141465[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 28. AdamsRIdentification of essential oil components by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry2007Carol StreamAllured Publishing804
  • 29. MosmannTRapid colorimetric assay for cellular growth and survival: application to proliferation and cytotoxicity assaysJ Immunol Methods19836515563[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 30. SharrerTOpinion-“ HeLa” herself-It’s high time we honored the memory of Henrietta Lacks, the woman who gave us immortal cellsScientist20062072223[Google Scholar]
  • 31. NewboldRFOverellRWFibroblast immortality is a prerequisite for transformation by EJ c-Ha-ras oncogeneNature19833045927648651[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 32. VahediFNajafiMFBozariKEvaluation of inhibitory effect and apoptosis induction of Zyzyphus Jujube on tumor cell lines, an in vitro preliminary studyCytotechnology2008562105111[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 33. MomtazSHusseinAAOstadSNAbdollahiMLallNGrowth inhibition and induction of apoptosis in human cancerous HeLa cells by Maytenus procumbensFood Chem Toxicol2013513845[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 34. Ayaz M, Junaid M, Ullah F, Sadiq A, Subhan F, Khan MA, Ahmad W, Ali G, Imran M, Ahmad S: Molecularly Characterized Solvent Extracts and Saponins from Polygonum hydropiper L. Show High Anti-Angiogenic, Anti-Tumor, Brine Shrimp, and Fibroblast NIH/3T3 Cell Line Cytotoxicity. Front Pharmacol. 2016, 7.
  • 35. ShenYJinLXiaoPLuYBaoJTotal phenolics, flavonoids, antioxidant capacity in rice grain and their relations to grain color, size and weightJ Cereal Sci2009491106111[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 36. PalchaudhuriRHergenrotherPJDNA as a target for anticancer compounds: methods to determine the mode of binding and the mechanism of actionCurr Opin Biotechnol2007186497503[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 37. ZebAAhmadSUllahFAyazMSadiqAAnti-nociceptive Activity of Ethnomedicinally Important Analgesic Plant Isodon rugosus Wall. ex Benth: Mechanistic Study and Identifications of Bioactive CompoundsFront Pharmacol20167200[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 38. KomiyaTKyohkonMOhwakiSEtoJKatsuzakiHImaiKKataokaTYoshiokaKIshiiYHibasamiHPhytol induces programmed cell death in human lymphoid leukemia Molt 4B cellsInt J Mol Med199944377457[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 39. FlescherEJasmonates–a new family of anti-cancer agentsAnti-Cancer Drugs2005169911916[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 40. ZhangJ-YTaoL-YLiangY-JChenL-mMiY-JZhengL-SWangFSheZ-GLinY-CToKKFuLWAnthracenedione derivatives as anticancer agents isolated from secondary metabolites of the mangrove endophytic fungiMarine Drugs20108414691481[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 41. FangJ-YFangC-LHongC-TChenH-YLinT-YWeiH-MCapsaicin and nonivamide as novel skin permeation enhancers for indomethacinEur J Pharm Sci2001123195203[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 42. PopeLEKhalilMHMarcellettiJFKatzLRKatzDHTreatment of hyperproliferative skin disorders with C18 to C20 aliphatic alcoholsGoogle Patents2001[Google Scholar]
  • 43. FirestoneGLSundarSNAnticancer activities of artemisinin and its bioactive derivativesExpert Rev Mol Med200911e32[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 44. YuWJiaLParkSKLiJGopalanASimmons‐MenchacaMSandersBGKlineKAnticancer actions of natural and synthetic vitamin E forms: RRR‐α‐tocopherol blocks the anticancer actions of γ‐tocopherolMol Nutr Food Res2009531215731581[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 45. BaldioliMServiliMPerrettiGMontedoroGAntioxidant activity of tocopherols and phenolic compounds of virgin olive oilJ Am Oil Chem Soc1996731115891593[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 46. SalvadorJACarvalhoJFNevesMASilvestreSMLeitãoAJSilvaMMCSá e MeloMLSAnticancer steroids: linking natural and semi-synthetic compoundsNat Prod Rep2013302324374[PubMed][Google Scholar]
Collaboration tool especially designed for Life Science professionals.Drag-and-drop any entity to your messages.