| Features: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copper Metal Copper levels are considerably elevated in various malignancies. Copper [Cu(II)] is a transition and trace element in living organisms. It increases reactive oxygen species (ROS) and free-radical generation that might damage biomolecules like DNA, proteins, and lipids. RDA: 900 mcg, ULs: 10,000mcg Copper (dietary/physiology) ≠ copper-loading therapeutics ≠ copper nanoparticles. For Cu nanoparticles, the dominant and most reproducible theme is toxicity via ROS → mitochondrial damage/genotoxicity, not clean tumor selectivity. - Copper acts as a critical cofactor for numerous enzymes involved in redox reactions, energy production, and connective tissue formation. - Increased copper levels in the tumor microenvironment can enhance angiogenic signaling and thus supply the tumor with necessary oxygen and nutrients, facilitating tumor growth and metastasis. - Copper can participate in redox cycling reactions, similar to the Fenton reaction, leading to the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS). - Cancer cells often exhibit altered copper homeostasis, with some studies showing elevated copper levels in tumor tissues relative to normal tissues. Copper serves a dual role in cancer: Imbalanced copper metabolism promotes tumor cell proliferation and survival by activating the receptor tyrosine kinase, PI3K/Akt/mTOR, and MAPK/ERK signaling pathways, while cuproptosis suppresses tumor growth by inducing cell death and activating immune responses Two main approaches are: - Copper Chelation: Drugs that bind copper (chelators) can reduce the bioavailability of copper, potentially inhibiting angiogenesis and other copper-dependent tumor processes. - Copper Ionophores: These agents facilitate the transport of copper into cancer cells to induce cytotoxicity by elevating intracellular copper levels beyond a tolerable threshold, leading to cell death. - Depletion of glutathione and stimulation of lipid peroxidation, catalase and superoxide dismutase. - Studies have shown that the level of copper in tumour cells and blood serum from cancer patients is elevated, and the conclusion is that cancer cells need more copper than healthy cells. (but also sometimes depleted). - Copper is a double-edged sword, maintaining normal cell development and promoting tumor development. - Tumor tissue has a higher demand for copper and is more susceptible to copper homeostasis, copper may modulate cancer cell survival through reactive oxygen species (ROS) excessive accumulation, proteasome inhibition and anti-angiogenesis. Copper and Cu NanoParticles — Copper is an essential redox-active trace metal and transition element that becomes oncology-relevant through copper homeostasis, copper-dependent enzymes, copper chelation, copper ionophore/copper-loading strategies, and copper-based nanoparticles. The formal classification is mixed: elemental/ionic metal biology, copper coordination chemistry, micronutrient/mineral exposure, and inorganic/nano-oncology modality. Standard abbreviations include Cu, Cu(I), Cu(II), CuNP, CuO-NP, Cu2O-NP, DSF/Cu, and TM for tetrathiomolybdate. The most important distinction is that dietary copper physiology, therapeutic copper depletion, copper ionophore loading, copper complexes, and copper nanoparticles are not interchangeable exposures. Primary mechanisms (ranked):
Bioavailability / PK relevance: Oral nutritional copper is normally tightly regulated by absorption, biliary excretion, ceruloplasmin binding, and intracellular chaperones. Copper nanoparticles and copper oxide nanoparticles have distinct PK and toxicology constraints because particle size, coating, dissolution, route of exposure, aggregation, and organ deposition can dominate exposure. Copper chelation requires systemic copper lowering, while copper-loading strategies require sufficient intracellular Cu delivery without unacceptable normal-tissue toxicity. In-vitro vs systemic exposure relevance: Many CuNP/CuO-NP anticancer experiments use direct cell-culture concentrations that may exceed safe or achievable systemic exposure and may reflect non-selective cytotoxicity. For ionic copper, free copper concentrations in vivo are extremely buffered, so simple CuSO4 or CuCl2 in-vitro experiments do not map cleanly onto physiological free copper. For DSF/Cu and copper complexes, exposure relevance depends on complex formation, albumin/protein binding, tumor delivery, and copper transporter state. Clinical evidence status: Copper biology is strongly supported mechanistically. Copper chelation has small human and phase II evidence, mainly as an anti-angiogenic or microenvironment strategy, but is not established standard oncology care. DSF/Cu has phase I/II and randomized clinical evidence in glioblastoma; the recurrent glioblastoma randomized trial did not show survival benefit and reported increased toxicity. CuNP/CuO-NP anticancer claims remain predominantly preclinical, with major translation constraints from oxidative, hepatic, renal, inflammatory, genotoxic, and mitochondrial toxicity signals. Interpretation note: Copper biology and copper nanoparticles should not be treated as equivalent exposures. Ionic copper, nutritional copper, copper chelation, copper ionophores, copper complexes, CuNPs, CuO-NPs, and Cu2O-NPs differ in pharmacokinetics, intracellular copper delivery, redox behavior, biodistribution, and toxicity. Directional tags such as ROS↑, angiogenesis↑/↓, GSH↓, NRF2↑/↓, and chemosensitization should be interpreted according to exposure class. Copper Cancer Mechanism Table
Time-Scale Flag (TSF): P / R / G
Copper Nanoparticles: CuNP / CuO-NP (tox + “anticancer” claims are mostly preclinical) Copper Nanoparticle Cancer Mechanism Table
Time-Scale Flag (TSF): P / R / G
|
| Source: TCGA |
| Type: Antiapoptotic |
| Nrf2 is responsible for regulating an extensive panel of antioxidant enzymes involved in the detoxification and elimination of oxidative stress. Thought of as "Master Regulator" of antioxidant response. -One way to estimate Nrf2 induction is through the expression of NQO1. NQO1, the most potent inducer: SFN 0.2 μM, quercetin (2.5 μM), curcumin (2.7 μM), Silymarin (3.6 μM), tamoxifen (5.9 μM), genistein (6.2 μM ), beta-carotene (7.2μM), lutein (17 μM), resveratrol (21 μM), indol-3-carbinol (50 μM), chlorophyll (250 μM), alpha-cryptoxanthin (1.8 mM), and zeaxanthin (2.2 mM) 1. Raising Nrf2 enhances the cell's antioxidant defenses and ↓ROS. This strategy is used to decrease chemo-radio side effects. 2. Downregulating Nrf2 lowers antioxidant defenses and ↑ROS. In cancer cells this leads to DNA damage, and cell death. 3. However there are some cases where increasing Nrf2 paradoxically causes an increase in ROS (cancer cells). Such as cases of Mitochondial overload, signal crosstalk, reductive stress -In some cases, Nrf2 is overexpressed in cancer cells, which can lead to the activation of genes involved in cell proliferation, angiogenesis, and metastasis. This can contribute to the development of resistance to chemotherapy and targeted therapies. -Increased Nrf2 expression: Lung, Breast, Colorectal, Prostrate. Decreased Nrf2 expression: Skine, Liver, Pancreatic. -Nrf2 is a cytoprotective transcription factor which demonstrated both a negative effect as well as a positive effect on cancer - "promotes Nrf2 translocation from the cytoplasm to the nucleus," means facilitates the movement of Nrf2 into the nucleus, thereby enhancing the cell's antioxidant and cytoprotective responses. -Major regulator of Nrf2 activity in cells is the cytosolic inhibitor Keap1. Nrf2 Inhibitors and Activators Nrf2 Inhibitors: Brusatol, Luteolin, Trigonelline, VitC, Retinoic acid, Chrysin Nrf2 Activators: SFN, OPZ EGCG, Resveratrol, DATS, CUR, CDDO, Api - potent Nrf2 inducers from plants include sulforaphane, curcumin, EGCG, resveratrol, caffeic acid phenethyl ester, wasabi, cafestol and kahweol (coffee), cinnamon, ginger, garlic, lycopene, rosemany Nrf2 plays dual roles in that it can protect normal tissues against oxidative damage and can act as an oncogenic protein in tumor tissue. – In healthy tissues, NRF2 activation helps protect cells from oxidative damage and maintains cellular homeostasis. – In many cancers, constitutive activation of NRF2 (often through mutations in NRF2 itself or loss-of-function mutations in KEAP1) leads to an enhanced antioxidant capacity. – This upregulation can promote tumor cell survival by enabling cancer cells to thrive under oxidative stress, resist chemotherapeutic agents, and sustain metabolic reprogramming. – Elevated NRF2 levels have been implicated in promoting tumor growth, metastasis, and resistance to therapy in various malignancies. – High or sustained NRF2 activity is frequently associated with aggressive tumor phenotypes, poorer prognosis, and decreased overall survival in several cancer types. – While its activation is essential for protecting normal cells from oxidative stress, aberrant or sustained NRF2 activation in tumor cells can lead to enhanced survival, therapeutic resistance, and tumor progression. NRF2 inhibitors: (to decrease antioxidant defenses and increase cell death from ROS). -Brusatol: most cited natural inhibitors of Nrf2. -Luteolin: luteolin can reduce Nrf2 activity in specific cancer models and may enhance cell sensitivity to chemotherapy. However, luteolin is also known as an antioxidant, and its influence on Nrf2 can sometimes be context dependent. -Apigenin: certain studies to down‑regulate Nrf2 in cancer cells: Dose and context dependent . -Oridonin: -Wogonin: although its effects might be cell‑ and dose‑specific. - Withaferin A |
| 5007- | DSF, | Cu, | Nrf2/HO-1 Alleviates Disulfiram/Copper-Induced Ferroptosis in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma |
| - | vitro+vivo, | Oral, | NA |
| - | vitro+vivo, | lymphoma, | NA |
| 5006- | DSF, | Cu, | Disulfiram targeting lymphoid malignant cell lines via ROS-JNK activation as well as Nrf2 and NF-kB pathway inhibition |
| - | vitro+vivo, | lymphoma, | NA |
Query results interpretion may depend on "conditions" listed in the research papers. Such Conditions may include : -low or high Dose -format for product, such as nano of lipid formations -different cell line effects -synergies with other products -if effect was for normal or cancerous cells
Filter Conditions: Pro/AntiFlg:% IllCat:% CanType:% Cells:% prod#:64 Target#:226 State#:% Dir#:%
wNotes=0 sortOrder:rid,rpid