Allicin enhances chemotherapeutic response and ameliorates tamoxifen-induced liver injury in experimental animals

Figures & data

Table 1. Effect of allicin (5 and 10 µM) on the cytotoxic effect of TAM (3 µM) on cultured EAC cells.

Treatment	% survival of cultured EAC cells
Control	96.0 ± 0.32
Tamoxifen	52.33 ± 3.71*
Allicin (5 µM)	66.67 ± 1.67*#
Allicin (10 µM)	54.33 ± 2.33*
TAM/allicin (5 µM)	35.00 ± 2.88*$
TAM/allicin (10 µM)	29.00 ± 2.08*@

Data are expressed as mean ± SEM, n = 3.

p < 0.05 compared with the control group (*) and compared with the TAM-treated group (#).

p < 0.01 ($) and p < 0.001 (@) compared with the TAM-treated group. A one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey–Kramer’s multiple comparisons post hoc test were used.

Table 2. Effect of TAM (1 mg/kg) and/or allicin (10 mg/kg) on tumor size in mice after 21 d treatment.

	Tumor size (mm^3)
Treatment	Day 0	Day 21	ΔT/ΔC %	% inhibition
Control	90.5 ± 5.8	452.7 ± 30.2	100	0
TAM	80.4 ± 7.7	190.5 ± 9.3*	30	70
Allicin	85.4 ± 6.6	250.6 ± 5.7*	45	55
TAM/allicin	75.2 ± 5.9	140.4 ± 7.6*#	18	82

Data are expressed as mean ± SEM, n = 10. p < 0.05 compared with the control group (*) and compared with the TAM-treated group (#). A one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey–Kramer’s multiple comparisons post hoc test were used.

Table 3. Effect of oral administration of allicin on serum hepatic profile enzymes; (ALT, AST, γGT, LDH, and ALP) of TAM-treated rats.

Group	sALT (U/ml)	sAST (U/ml)	γGT (U/L)	LDH (U/L)	ALP (U/L)
Control	43.0 ± 3.5	82.0 ± 1.8	21.3 ± 2.3	53.6 ± 3.1	154.3 ± 14.3
Allicin	41.7 ± 2.8	91.6 ± 3.2	20.6 ± 2.4	50.0 ± 2.6	150.6 ± 15.5
TAM	240.8 ± 12.2*	435.0 ± 17.3*	112.0 ± 4.4*	156.0 ± 4.4*	395.6 ± 17.7*
TAM/allicin	140.0 ± 12.4*#	143.0 ± 8.0*#	59.3 ± 6.4*#	103.3 ± 7.1*#	246.3 ± 4.6*#

Data are expressed as mean ± SEM, n = 6.

p < 0.05 compared with the control group (*) and compared with the TAM-treated group (#). A one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey–Kramer’s multiple comparisons post hoc test were used.

Table 4. Effect of oral administration of allicin on serum total bilirubin, and total protein of TAM-treated rats.

Group	Total bilirubin (mg/dl)	Total protein (g/dl)
Control	0.22 ± 0.012	6.67 ± 0.298
Allicin	0.23 ± 0.017	5.65 ± 0.502
TAM	0.59 ± 0.03*	3.12 ± 0.13*
TAM/allicin	0.38 ± 0.02*#	4.8 ± 0.1*#

Data are expressed as mean ± SEM, n = 6.

p < 0.05 compared with the control group (*) and compared with the TAM-treated group (#). A one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey–Kramer’s multiple comparisons post hoc test were used.

Figure 1. Effect of oral administration of allicin on (A) lipid peroxides formation expressed as TBARS, (B) GSH, (C) SOD, and (D) TNF-α of TAM-intoxicated rat liver homogenate. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM, n = 6. p < 0.05 compared with the control group (*) and compared with the TAM-treated group (#). A one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey–Kramer’s multiple comparisons post hoc test were used.