Anticancer properties of propofol-docosahexaenoate and propofol-eicosapentaenoate on breast cancer cells

INTRODUCTION: Epidemiological evidence strongly links fish oil, which is rich in docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), with low incidences of several types of cancer. The inhibitory effects of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids on cancer development and progression are supported by studies with cultured cells and animal models. Propofol (2,6-diisopropylphenol) is the most extensively used general anesthetic–sedative agent employed today and is nontoxic to humans at high levels (50 μg/ml). Clinically relevant concentrations of propofol (3 to 8 μg/ml; 20 to 50 μM) have also been reported to have anticancer activities. The present study describes the synthesis, purification, characterization and evaluation of two novel anticancer conjugates, propofol-docosahexaenoate (propofol-DHA) and propofol-eicosapentaenoate (propofol-EPA). METHODS: The conjugates linking an omega-3 fatty acid, either DHA or EPA, with propofol were synthesized and tested for their effects on migration, adhesion and apoptosis on MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells. RESULTS: At low concentrations (25 μM), DHA, EPA or propofol alone or in combination had minimal effect on cell adhesion to vitronectin, cell migration against serum and the induction of apoptosis (only 5 to 15% of the cells became apoptotic). In contrast, the propofol-DHA or propofol-EPA conjugates significantly inhibited cell adhesion (15 to 30%) and migration (about 50%) and induced apoptosis (about 40%) in breast cancer cells. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the novel propofol-DHA and propofol-EPA conjugates reported here may be useful for the treatment of breast cancer

The efficacy and safety of prokinetic agents in critically ill patients receiving enteral nutrition: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Intolerance to enteral nutrition is common in critically ill adults, and may result in significant morbidity including ileus, abdominal distension, vomiting and potential aspiration events. Prokinetic agents are prescribed to improve gastric emptying. However, the efficacy and safety of these agents in critically ill patients is not well-defined. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy and safety of prokinetic agents in critically ill patients. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from inception up to January 2016. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of critically ill adults assigned to receive a prokinetic agent or placebo, and that reported relevant clinical outcomes. Two independent reviewers screened potentially eligible articles, selected eligible studies, and abstracted pertinent data. We calculated pooled relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference for continuous outcomes, with the corresponding 95 % confidence interval (CI). We assessed risk of bias using Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the quality of evidence using grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) methodology. RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs (enrolling 1341 patients) met our inclusion criteria. Prokinetic agents significantly reduced feeding intolerance (RR 0.73, 95 % CI 0.55, 0.97; P = 0.03; moderate certainty), which translated to 17.3 % (95 % CI 5, 26.8 %) absolute reduction in feeding intolerance. Prokinetics also reduced the risk of developing high gastric residual volumes (RR 0.69; 95 % CI 0.52, 0.91; P = 0.009; moderate quality) and increased the success of post-pyloric feeding tube placement (RR 1.60, 95 % CI 1.17, 2.21; P = 0.004; moderate quality). There was no significant improvement in the risk of vomiting, diarrhea, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay or mortality. Prokinetic agents also did not significantly increase the rate of diarrhea. CONCLUSION: There is moderate-quality evidence that prokinetic agents reduce feeding intolerance in critically ill patients compared to placebo or no intervention. However, the impact on other clinical outcomes such as pneumonia, mortality, and ICU length of stay is unclear