‘UkrainTM, a semisynthetic Chelidonium majus alkaloid derivative, acts by inhibition of tubulin polymerization in normal and malignant cell lines’
Panzer et al, 2000
INTRODUCTION includes many Statements with references on author's unpublished data, which actually have nothing to do with paper’s topic, which are without any proof here. The selection of cell lines was not ideal again. No normal (primary) cells were involved in experiment; from the other hand, transformed kidney monkey cell line (Vero) is not a good model in an investigation of anti-cancer drug. Gene expression profiles are different in transformed and cancer cells. Haematoxylin/eosin staining technique is not so good for cell phases analysis, you can't rnake proper conclusion from that. But most important, authors missed one BIG point in their
RESULTS. As clearly seen from flow cytometry experiments, especially in HELA cells after 12.5 mkg/ml 48 hrs, and less visible in WHC05 cells, after Ukrain treatment the cells quickly start to accumulate not only in mitotic phase, but larger portion undergoes APOPTOSIS (a shift to the left side, into <1n DNA on the treated cells graphs which means that DNA is degrading). So, it is likely that affected cells (or majority of cells) rather will die. The arrested cells in other lines could die too, not necessary in the same M phase, but when they come to G0/1 phase in the next cycle.even upon Ukrain withdrawal. That what we seen in our experiments. In this sense,
DISCUSSION could be interpreted in slightly different direction. Obviously, drug concentration and time treatment need to be optimized to have 100% cell Cancer dead, and it could be cell line/tissue/patient dependent. But HELA cells examples they provided is really good. They just did not interpreted it right it is not about mitotic arrest, it's about apoptosis. RANGE OF THE DOSES used could be more gradual, especially around the point where the cells start to accumulate in G2/M phase (10-12 mkg/ml). Moreover, considering that so high doses, like 50 mcg/ml, are never administered in vivo, it was not really relevant to select such high Ukrain concentration for experiment.
As a CONCLUSION, not much done by this paper, except the negative Statements and not correct Interpretation. Rather presented data could be used as supportive evidence. The fact that drug action is reversible is quite positive from our understanding.