Studies of the cytogenotoxicity of ingredients of betel quid on Chinese hamster ovary cells

• Main Author: 晉淑意
• Other Authors: 林瑞生
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 1999
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/23057616122749748329

碩士 === 中山醫學院 === 營養科學研究所 === 87 === Betel chewing is a widespread habit in Taiwan, Southeast Asia and India. According to the statistical data of 1994, we know that the amount of betel quid chewier is about 10-15% of total population on earth, and the consumers of betel quid are still growing. Unfortunately, many investigators have shown that the habit of chewing betel quid is correlated to the high incidence of oral cancer and esophageal carcinoma (Muir and Kirk,1960; Hirayama, 1986; IARC,1985). However, the chemical ingredients of betel quid are a complex mixture including arecoline, Cu2+, catechin and glycyrrhizin. Since betel quid chewing exposes the consumer to a mixture of these compounds, a study of cytogenotoxicity of these compounds are important to understand their beneficial and harmful effects. Therefore, in this study, micronucleus (MN) test was employed to measure the genotoxic potential of arecoline, catechin, glycyrrhizin and Cu2+ in Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) Cells. Our results showed that all of the four ingredients of betel quid, arecoline, catechin, glycyrrhizin and Cu2+, significantly elevated the number of micronucleated cells, and glycyrrhizin caused genotoxicity in a concentration-dependent manner. In addition, the genotoxic interactions of Cu2+ and arecoline, catechin or glycyrrhizin were complex. Cu2+ attenuated the genotoxicity of glycyrrhizin, however, potentiated the genotoxicity of arecoline, but did not affect the genotoxicity of catechin. In this study, MTT assay, nuclear division index (NDI) and cell morphological change were conducted to study the cytotoxicity of the four ingredients of betel quid in CHO cells. The results of MTT assay showed that all of the four compounds at high concentrations significantly decreased the viability of CHO cells, but Cu2+ attenuated the cytotoxicity of arecoline, catechin or glycyrrhizin, respectively. In observation of cell morphology found that only catechin could cause the morphological change in CHO cells. On the other hand, the results of NDI were complex, both arecoline and glycyrrhizin increased cell proliferation at lower concentrations, but depressed cell proliferation at higher concentrations. In addition, both catechin and CuCl2 increased cell proliferation. Finally, the results of flow cytometry showed that any of the four ingredients didn’t cause hypoploidy cells, change cellular size, and affect cellular glandularity. Obviously, the four ingredients didn’t cause apoptosis in CHO cells. According to these findings, it is concluded that all the four ingredients of betel quid cause both genotoxicity and cytotoxicity in CHO cells. However, the cytogenotoxic interactions among these ingredients of betel quid are complex.