Comparison of the effects of lipoic acid and glutathione against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity in auditory cells

Doo Yeob Koo, Se Hee Lee, Sung Ho Lee, Jiwon Chang, Hak Hyun Jung, Gi Jung Im

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives The aims of this study were to examine lipoic acid (LA)- or glutathione (GSH)-mediated protection against cytotoxicity following cisplatin exposure in HEI-OC1 auditory cells and measure the potential of LA and GSH to scavenge reactive oxygen species (ROS). This study also compares their protective effects and discusses the determination of a preventive or therapeutic dose. Methods HEI-OC1 cells were pretreated with LA or GSH for 24 h and then exposed to 15 μM cisplatin for 48 h. The resulting cytotoxicity was measured using a cell counting kit-8, and intracellular ROS level was measured using flow cytometry. The protective or anti-ROS effects of LA and GSH were compared. Measurement of caspase 3, 8, 9 activity and Western blot analysis of PARP were performed. Results Pretreatment with LA at 300 μM and GSH at 3 mM protected HEI-OC1 cells against cisplatin-induced cytotoxicity and significantly reduced the cisplatin-induced increase in ROS. LA showed a significantly more effective protection against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity compared to that shown by GSH (85.4% vs. 73.1% cell viability). Both LA and GSH showed the maximal protective effect at different concentrations in normal or cisplatin-induced cytotoxic conditions. The preventive or therapeutic dose for harmful conditions is quite different for the two drugs and needs careful adjustments. Conclusion This comparative study on the protective effects of LA and GSH against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity in an auditory cell line posed many challenges. Although LA and GSH showed a significant protective effect against cisplatin, the LA's effect was superior. The concentration at which the maximal protective effect of LA or GSH was noted was 3 times higher in cytotoxic conditions than in normal conditions, which suggests the need for drug dose adjustments based on the purpose (preventive or therapeutic).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)30-36
Number of pages7
JournalInternational Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology
Volume91
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016 Dec 1

Fingerprint

Thioctic Acid
Cisplatin
Glutathione
Reactive Oxygen Species
Caspase 8
Caspase 3
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Cell Survival
Flow Cytometry
Therapeutics
Western Blotting

Keywords

  • Cisplatin
  • Glutathione
  • Lipoic acid
  • Ototoxicity
  • Reactive oxygen species

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Comparison of the effects of lipoic acid and glutathione against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity in auditory cells. / Koo, Doo Yeob; Lee, Se Hee; Lee, Sung Ho; Chang, Jiwon; Jung, Hak Hyun; Im, Gi Jung.

In: International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, Vol. 91, 01.12.2016, p. 30-36.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1e96970c3f604df1b9ae0155c162d937,
title = "Comparison of the effects of lipoic acid and glutathione against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity in auditory cells",
abstract = "Objectives The aims of this study were to examine lipoic acid (LA)- or glutathione (GSH)-mediated protection against cytotoxicity following cisplatin exposure in HEI-OC1 auditory cells and measure the potential of LA and GSH to scavenge reactive oxygen species (ROS). This study also compares their protective effects and discusses the determination of a preventive or therapeutic dose. Methods HEI-OC1 cells were pretreated with LA or GSH for 24 h and then exposed to 15 μM cisplatin for 48 h. The resulting cytotoxicity was measured using a cell counting kit-8, and intracellular ROS level was measured using flow cytometry. The protective or anti-ROS effects of LA and GSH were compared. Measurement of caspase 3, 8, 9 activity and Western blot analysis of PARP were performed. Results Pretreatment with LA at 300 μM and GSH at 3 mM protected HEI-OC1 cells against cisplatin-induced cytotoxicity and significantly reduced the cisplatin-induced increase in ROS. LA showed a significantly more effective protection against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity compared to that shown by GSH (85.4{\%} vs. 73.1{\%} cell viability). Both LA and GSH showed the maximal protective effect at different concentrations in normal or cisplatin-induced cytotoxic conditions. The preventive or therapeutic dose for harmful conditions is quite different for the two drugs and needs careful adjustments. Conclusion This comparative study on the protective effects of LA and GSH against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity in an auditory cell line posed many challenges. Although LA and GSH showed a significant protective effect against cisplatin, the LA's effect was superior. The concentration at which the maximal protective effect of LA or GSH was noted was 3 times higher in cytotoxic conditions than in normal conditions, which suggests the need for drug dose adjustments based on the purpose (preventive or therapeutic).",
keywords = "Cisplatin, Glutathione, Lipoic acid, Ototoxicity, Reactive oxygen species",
author = "Koo, {Doo Yeob} and Lee, {Se Hee} and Lee, {Sung Ho} and Jiwon Chang and Jung, {Hak Hyun} and Im, {Gi Jung}",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijporl.2016.10.008",
language = "English",
volume = "91",
pages = "30--36",
journal = "International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology",
issn = "0165-5876",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of the effects of lipoic acid and glutathione against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity in auditory cells

AU - Koo, Doo Yeob

AU - Lee, Se Hee

AU - Lee, Sung Ho

AU - Chang, Jiwon

AU - Jung, Hak Hyun

AU - Im, Gi Jung

PY - 2016/12/1

Y1 - 2016/12/1

N2 - Objectives The aims of this study were to examine lipoic acid (LA)- or glutathione (GSH)-mediated protection against cytotoxicity following cisplatin exposure in HEI-OC1 auditory cells and measure the potential of LA and GSH to scavenge reactive oxygen species (ROS). This study also compares their protective effects and discusses the determination of a preventive or therapeutic dose. Methods HEI-OC1 cells were pretreated with LA or GSH for 24 h and then exposed to 15 μM cisplatin for 48 h. The resulting cytotoxicity was measured using a cell counting kit-8, and intracellular ROS level was measured using flow cytometry. The protective or anti-ROS effects of LA and GSH were compared. Measurement of caspase 3, 8, 9 activity and Western blot analysis of PARP were performed. Results Pretreatment with LA at 300 μM and GSH at 3 mM protected HEI-OC1 cells against cisplatin-induced cytotoxicity and significantly reduced the cisplatin-induced increase in ROS. LA showed a significantly more effective protection against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity compared to that shown by GSH (85.4% vs. 73.1% cell viability). Both LA and GSH showed the maximal protective effect at different concentrations in normal or cisplatin-induced cytotoxic conditions. The preventive or therapeutic dose for harmful conditions is quite different for the two drugs and needs careful adjustments. Conclusion This comparative study on the protective effects of LA and GSH against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity in an auditory cell line posed many challenges. Although LA and GSH showed a significant protective effect against cisplatin, the LA's effect was superior. The concentration at which the maximal protective effect of LA or GSH was noted was 3 times higher in cytotoxic conditions than in normal conditions, which suggests the need for drug dose adjustments based on the purpose (preventive or therapeutic).

AB - Objectives The aims of this study were to examine lipoic acid (LA)- or glutathione (GSH)-mediated protection against cytotoxicity following cisplatin exposure in HEI-OC1 auditory cells and measure the potential of LA and GSH to scavenge reactive oxygen species (ROS). This study also compares their protective effects and discusses the determination of a preventive or therapeutic dose. Methods HEI-OC1 cells were pretreated with LA or GSH for 24 h and then exposed to 15 μM cisplatin for 48 h. The resulting cytotoxicity was measured using a cell counting kit-8, and intracellular ROS level was measured using flow cytometry. The protective or anti-ROS effects of LA and GSH were compared. Measurement of caspase 3, 8, 9 activity and Western blot analysis of PARP were performed. Results Pretreatment with LA at 300 μM and GSH at 3 mM protected HEI-OC1 cells against cisplatin-induced cytotoxicity and significantly reduced the cisplatin-induced increase in ROS. LA showed a significantly more effective protection against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity compared to that shown by GSH (85.4% vs. 73.1% cell viability). Both LA and GSH showed the maximal protective effect at different concentrations in normal or cisplatin-induced cytotoxic conditions. The preventive or therapeutic dose for harmful conditions is quite different for the two drugs and needs careful adjustments. Conclusion This comparative study on the protective effects of LA and GSH against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity in an auditory cell line posed many challenges. Although LA and GSH showed a significant protective effect against cisplatin, the LA's effect was superior. The concentration at which the maximal protective effect of LA or GSH was noted was 3 times higher in cytotoxic conditions than in normal conditions, which suggests the need for drug dose adjustments based on the purpose (preventive or therapeutic).

KW - Cisplatin

KW - Glutathione

KW - Lipoic acid

KW - Ototoxicity

KW - Reactive oxygen species

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84991669564&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84991669564&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijporl.2016.10.008

DO - 10.1016/j.ijporl.2016.10.008

M3 - Article

C2 - 27863638

AN - SCOPUS:84991669564

VL - 91

SP - 30

EP - 36

JO - International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology

JF - International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology

SN - 0165-5876

ER -