Search

[EN] Radioprotection with natural products may be relevant to the mitigation of ionizing radiation-induced damage in mammalian systems; in this sense, propolis extracts have shown effects such as antioxidant, antitumoral, anti-inflammatory, and immunostimulant. We report for the first time a cytogenetic study to evaluate the radioprotective effect, in vitro, of propolis against radiation-induced chromosomal damage. Lymphocytes were cultured with increasing concentrations of ethanol extract of propolis (EEP), including 20, 40, 120, 250, 500, 750, 1000, and 2000 ¿g mL-1 and then exposed to 2 Gy ¿-rays. A significant and concentration-dependent decrease is observed in the frequency of chromosome aberrations in samples treated with EEP. The protection against the formation of dicentrics was concentration-dependent, with a maximum protection at 120 ¿g mL-1 of EEP. The observed frequency of dicentrics is described as negative exponential function, indicating that the maximum protectible fraction of dicentrics is approximately 44. Free radical scavenging and antioxidant activities are the mechanisms that these substances use to protect cells from ionizing radiation. Copyright © 2011 A. Montoro et al., This research was supported in part by the Company Dieteticos Intersa S.A., U.P.V., and Hospital Universitario La Fe of Valencia and Consejo de Seguridad Nuclear (2696/SRO). The authors express their appreciation to Dr. Pepe Perez (Hospital Universitario La Fe) and Dr. Alberto Yuste (U.P.V.).

[EN] Radioprotection with natural products may be relevant to the mitigation of ionizing radiation-induced damage in mammalian systems; in this sense, propolis extracts have shown effects such as antioxidant, antitumoral, anti-inflammatory, and immunostimulant. We report for the first time a cytogenetic study to evaluate the radioprotective effect, in vitro, of propolis against radiation-induced chromosomal damage. Lymphocytes were cultured with increasing concentrations of ethanol extract of propolis (EEP), including 20, 40, 120, 250, 500, 750, 1000, and 2000 ¿g mL-1 and then exposed to 2 Gy ¿-rays. A significant and concentration-dependent decrease is observed in the frequency of chromosome aberrations in samples treated with EEP. The protection against the formation of dicentrics was concentration-dependent, with a maximum protection at 120 ¿g mL-1 of EEP. The observed frequency of dicentrics is described as negative exponential function, indicating that the maximum protectible fraction of dicentrics is approximately 44. Free radical scavenging and antioxidant activities are the mechanisms that these substances use to protect cells from ionizing radiation. Copyright © 2011 A. Montoro et al. This research was supported in part by the Company Dieteticos Intersa S.A., U.P.V., and Hospital Universitario La Fe of Valencia and Consejo de Seguridad Nuclear (2696/SRO). The authors express their appreciation to Dr. Pepe Perez (Hospital Universitario La Fe) and Dr. Alberto Yuste (U.P.V.).

Introduction: In Mexico during 2008, were reported 127,604 new cancer cases, 6,347 of them were colorectal cancer cases and 4,276 Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) cases. Objective: To Evaluate Health Related Quality of Life in Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and colorectal cancer cases in different clinical stages, attended in a High Specialty Medical facility at the Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, during a 13 month period. Results: 162 patients were included, 56.8% (n=92) with NHL and 43.2% (n=70) with colorectal cancer. The scores obtained in the NHL group were: Global health status/QoL: 67.75 (±27.55), physical functioning 69.64 (±29.98), role functioning 71.38 (±33.73), emotional functioning 69.7 (±26.57), cognitive functioning 75.36 (±28.01), social functioning 79.35 (±29.38), fatigue 35.27 (±28.27), nausea and vomiting 13.41 (±21.85), pain 28.08 (±30.25), dyspnea 19.20 (±32.11), insomnia 30.80 (±38.03), appetite lost 26.45 (±36.16), constipation 19.20 (±32.11), diarrhea 12.32 (±26.48), financial difficulties 26.09 (±35.57). In colorectal cancer patients the scores were: Global health status/QoL: 68.21 (±24.46), physical functioning 67.38 (±30.45), role functioning 65.48 (±35.70), emotional functioning 66.43 (±26.84), cognitive functioning 78.57 (±26.49), social functioning 75.24 (±31.05), fatigue 37.78 (±31.62), nausea and vomiting 20.00 (±28.32), pain 37.38 (±34.45), dyspnea 11.90 (±26.64), insomnia 28.09 (±35.73), appetite lost 23.81 (±36.40), constipation 19.05 (±32.88), diarrhea 20.95 (±31.17), financial difficulties 34.76 (±38.67). Conclusions: With these basal results is important a follow-up with special attention to the treatment and attendance processes, in patients with this neoplasms and their impact on the quality of life. © 2011 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR).

Introduction: Quality of Life is the most studied PRO (patient reported outcome) in cancer patients. With early diagnosis and better treatments in breast cancer, this entity has been transformed in a chronic disease with longer survival. The joint effects of diseases and treatment on quality of life are each day more important to consider in survival patients. Objective: To evaluate Quality of Life, Socioeconomic factors, co-morbidities, and the attendance process impact on quality of life in breast cancer women with different clinical stages attending at the Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social using the EORCT QLQ-C30 Results: The scores of EORTC QLQ-C30 (v3) were: Global health status / QoL: 73.47 (±20.81), physical functioning 76.98 (±20.85), role functioning 76.60 (±27.57), emotional functioning 64.53 (±26.81), cognitive functioning 74.47 (±26.02), social functioning 84.96 (±23.20), fatigue 31.94 (±25.45), nausea and vomiting 19.49 (±26.93), pain 28.95 (±27.27), dyspnea 15.29 (±24.62), insomnia 35.13 (±32.10), appetite lost 18.04 (±28.75), 18.04 (±28.75), constipation 19.20 (±32.11), diarrhea 12.9 (±24.25), financial difficulties 40.57 (±37.26). The scores with EORTC QLQ-BR23 were: body image 74.84 (±31.69), sexual functioning13.73 (±22.55), sexual enjoyment 32.86 (±36.17), future perspectives 51.69 (±38.00), systemic therapy side effects 30.82 (±20.71), breast symptoms22.85 (±23.49), arm symptoms 27.53 (±24.75), upsert by hair loss 43.80 (±44.01). Conclusions: Clinical stage in breast cancer is associated with differences in the scores from fatigue, nausea and vomiting and financial difficulties according to the evolution of the disease and the physical detriment associated. Socio-demographic features were related role functioning, fatigue and pain in single women with higher scores. © 2011 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR).