Search

Metformin and paclitaxel therapy offer promising outcomes in the treatment of liver cancer. Combining paclitaxel with metformin enhances treatment effectiveness and mitigates the adverse effects associated with paclitaxel alone. This study explored the anticancer properties of metformin and paclitaxel in HepG2 liver cancer cells, MCF-7 breast cancer cells, and HCT116 colon cancer cells. The results demonstrated that the combination of these agents exhibited a lower IC50 in the tested cell lines compared to paclitaxel monotherapy. Notably, treating the HepG2 cell line with this combination led to a reduction in the G0/G1 phase and an increase in the S and G2/M phases, ultimately triggering early apoptosis. To further investigate the interaction between the cellular proteins with paclitaxel and metformin, an in silico study was conducted using proteins chosen from a protein data bank (PDB). Among the proteins studied, AMPK-α, EGFRK, and FKBP12-mTOR exhibited the highest binding free energy, with values of -11.01, -10.59, and -15.63 kcal/mol, respectively, indicating strong inhibitory or enhancing effects on these proteins. When HepG2 cells were exposed to both paclitaxel and metformin, there was an upregulation in the gene expression of AMPK-α , a key regulator of the energy balance in cancer growth, as well as apoptotic markers such as p53 and caspase-3 , along with autophagic markers including beclin1 and ATG4A . This combination therapy of metformin and paclitaxel exhibited significant potential as a treatment option for HepG2 liver cancer. In summary, the combination of metformin and paclitaxel not only enhances treatment efficacy but also reduces side effects. It induces cell cycle alterations and apoptosis and modulates key cellular proteins involved in cancer growth, making it a promising therapy for HepG2 liver cancer.

6-Mercaptopurine (6-MP) is a well-known immunosuppressive medication with proven anti-proliferative activities. 6-MP possesses incomplete and highly variable oral absorption due to its poor water solubility, which might reduce its anti-cancer properties. To overcome these negative effects, we developed neutral and positively charged drug-loaded liposomal formulations utilizing the thin-film hydration technique. The prepared liposomal formulations were characterized for their size, polydispersity index (PDI), zeta potential, and entrapment efficiency. The average size of the prepared liposomes was between 574.67 ± 37.29 and 660.47 ± 44.32 nm. Positively charged liposomes (F1 and F3) exhibited a lower PDI than the corresponding neutrally charged ones (F2 and F4). Entrapment efficiency was higher in the neutral liposomes when compared to the charged formulation. F1 showed the lowest IC 50 against HepG2, HCT116, and MCF-7 cancer cells. HepG2 cells treated with F1 showed the highest level of inhibition of cell proliferation with no evidence of apoptosis. Cell cycle analysis showed an increase in the G1/G0 and S phases, along with a decrease in the G2/M phases in the cell lines treated with drug loaded positively charged liposomes when compared to free positive liposomes, indicating arrest of cells in the S phase due to the stoppage of priming and DNA synthesis outside the mitotic phase. As a result, liposomes could be considered as an effective drug delivery system for treatment of a variety of cancers; they provide a chance that a nanoformulation of 6-MP will boost the cytotoxicity of the drug in a small pharmacological dose which provides a dosage advantage.