Amygdalin epimers exert discrepant anti-pulmonary fibrosis activity via inhibiting TGF-ß1/Smad2/3 pathway.

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) represents a chronic and progressive tissue repair response that leads to irreversible scarring and lung remodeling. The decoction of bitter almond usually contains amygdalin epimers in traditional clinical application for lung disease. To reveal the differences of cytotoxicity and antifibrotic effect between amygdalin epimers, and potential mechanism is also explored. The cytotoxicity of amygdalin epimers were evaluated with MRC-5 cells in vitro. Their antifibrotic activities were evaluated in bleomycin-induced C57BL/6 mice and TGF-ß1-induced MRC-5 cells. Here we demonstrated that L-amygdalin is more toxic of the amygdalin epimers in MRC-5 cells, and D-amygdalin is more effective in anti-pulmonary fibrosis among the amygdalin epimers in bleomycin-induced C57BL/6 mice. Herein, it was observed that D-amygdalin had a stronger inhibitory effect on inflammation than L-amygdalin, and had similar results in inhibiting the mRNA and protein expression levels of fibrosis-related biomarkers. The mechanism of anti-pulmonary fibrosis showed that amygdalin epimers suppressing expression of phosphorylation of Smads2/3, which implying deactivation of the TGF-ß1induced Smads2/3 signal pathway. This study evaluates the amygdalin epimers cytotoxicity and antifibrotic effect, and its mechanisms were related to the TGF-ß1/Smads2/3 signal pathway. It provides a reference for clinical safety and effectiveness of amygdalin epimers.

Life-Threatening Cyanide Intoxication after Ingestion of Amygdalin in Prehospital Care.

Amygdalin is originally a natural cyanogenic glycoside available as a dietary supplement used in the alternative treatment of cancer patients. Amygdalin hydroxylates to toxic cyanide in the body, which can cause life-threatening intoxication. The case report presents a 72-year-old patient with life-threatening cyanide poisoning after ingesting a dietary supplement containing amygdalin identified in prehospital care, which was successfully treated with hydroxocobalamin.

Inflammation, It's Regulation and Antiphlogistic Effect of the Cyanogenic Glycoside Amygdalin.

The inflammatory reaction accompanies in part or in full any disease process in the vascularized metazoan. This complicated reaction is controlled by regulatory mechanisms, some of which produce unpleasant symptomatic manifestations of inflammation. Therefore, there has been an effort to develop selective drugs aimed at removing pain, fever, or swelling. Gradually, however, serious adverse side effects of such inhibitors became apparent. Scientific research has therefore continued to explore new possibilities, including naturally available substances. Amygdalin is a cyanogenic glycoside present, e.g., in bitter almonds. This glycoside has already sparked many discussions among scientists, especially about its anticancer potential and related toxic cyanides. However, toxicity at different doses made it generally unacceptable. Although amygdalin given at the correct oral dose may not lead to poisoning, it has not yet been accurately quantified, as its action is often affected by different intestinal microbial consortia. Its pharmacological activities have been studied, but its effects on the body's inflammatory response are lacking. This review discusses the chemical structure, toxicity, and current knowledge of the molecular mechanism of amygdalin activity on immune functions, including the anti-inflammatory effect, but also discusses inflammation as such, its mediators with diverse functions, which are usually targeted by drugs.

Amygdalin, quackery or cure?

BACKGROUND: The cyanogenic diglucoside, amygdalin, has gained high popularity among cancer patients together with, or in place of, conventional therapy. Still, evidence based research on amygdalin is sparse and its benefit controversial. PURPOSE: Since so many cancer patients consume amygdalin, and many clinicians administer it without clear knowledge of its mode of action, current knowledge has been summarized and the pros and cons of its use weighed. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted for amygdalin relevant reports using the PubMed database with the main search term "Amygdalin" or "laetrile", at times combined with "cancer", "patient", "cyanide" or "toxic". We did not exclude any "unwanted" articles. Additionally, internet sources authorized by governmental or national institutions have also been included. SECTIONS: Individual chapters summarize pharmacokinetics, preclinical and clinical studies and toxicity. CONCLUSION: No convincing evidence showing that amygdalin induces rapid, distinct tumor regression in cancer patients, particularly in those with late-stage disease, is apparent. However, there is also no evidence that purified amygdalin, administered in "therapeutic" dosage, causes toxicity. Multiple aspects of amygdalin administration have not yet been adequately explored, making further investigation necessary to evaluate its actual therapeutic potential.

Laetrile treatment for cancer.

BACKGROUND: Laetrile is the name for a semi-synthetic compound which is chemically related to amygdalin, a cyanogenic glycoside from the kernels of apricots and various other species of the genus Prunus. Laetrile and amygdalin are promoted under various names for the treatment of cancer although there is no evidence for its efficacy. Due to possible cyanide poisoning, laetrile can be dangerous. OBJECTIVES: To assess the alleged anti-cancer effect and possible adverse effects of laetrile and amygdalin. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases: CENTRAL (2014, Issue 9); MEDLINE (1951-2014); EMBASE (1980-2014); AMED; Scirus; CINAHL (all from 1982-2015); CAMbase (from 1998-2015); the MetaRegister; the National Research Register; and our own files. We examined reference lists of included studies and review articles and we contacted experts in the field for knowledge of additional studies. We did not impose any restrictions of timer or language. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We searched eight databases and two registers for studies testing laetrile or amygdalin for the treatment of cancer. Two review authors screened and assessed articles for inclusion criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We located over 200 references, 63 were evaluated in the original review, 6 in the 2011 and none in this update. However, we did not identify any studies that met our inclusion criteria. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The claims that laetrile or amygdalin have beneficial effects for cancer patients are not currently supported by sound clinical data. There is a considerable risk of serious adverse effects from cyanide poisoning after laetrile or amygdalin, especially after oral ingestion. The risk-benefit balance of laetrile or amygdalin as a treatment for cancer is therefore unambiguously negative.

Advanced research on anti-tumor effects of amygdalin.

Malignant tumors are the major disease that cause serious damage to human health, and have been listed as the premier diseases which seriously threatened human health by World Health Organization (WHO). In recent years the development of antitumor drugs has been gradually transformed from cytotoxic drugs to improving the selectivity of drugs, overcoming multidrug resistance, development of new targeted drugs and low toxicity with high specificity drugs. Amygdalin is a natural product that owns antitumor activity, less side effects, widely sourced and relatively low priced. All these features make the amygdalin a promising antitumor drugs, if combined with conditional chemotherapy drugs, which can produce synergistic effect. In this paper, we summarized the pharmacological activity, toxicity and antitumor activity of amygdalin, mainly focused on the advanced research of amygdalin on its antitumor effects in recent years, providing new insights for the development of new anticancer drugs, new targets searching and natural antitumor mechanism investigations.

[Alternative means of drug therapy in cancer: letril].

Letril (amygdaline) is one of drugs of alternative therapy for cancer that is used over three decades and relates to cyanogenic glycosides received from kernels of various fruits (almonds, apricots, peaches, etc. The basis of suggestion of letril as antitumor agent is hypotheses about selective fermentative splitting of amygdaline in tumor cells with developing of cyanide that should cause to apoptosis as a result of aerobic glycolysis suppression. None of these assumptions found their experimental confirmation. In clinical trials there was established inefficiency of letril with a very high probability to develop severe cyanide intoxication. Despite obtained scientific data and absence of permission from the supervising institutions (FDA) letril is still advertised, produced and distributed as anti-tumor drug.

Laetrile treatment for cancer.

BACKGROUND: Laetrile is the name for a semi-synthetic compound which is chemically related to amygdalin, a cyanogenic glycoside from the kernels of apricots and various other species of the genus Prunus. Laetrile and amygdalin are promoted under various names for the treatment of cancer although there is no evidence for its efficacy. Due to possible cyanide poisoning, laetrile can be dangerous. OBJECTIVES: To assess the alleged anti-cancer effect and possible adverse effects of laetrile and amygdalin. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases: CENTRAL (2011, Issue 1); MEDLINE (1951-2011); EMBASE (1980-2011); AMED; Scirus; CancerLit; CINAHL (all from 1982-2011); CAMbase (from 1998-2011); the MetaRegister; the National Research Register; and our own files. We examined reference lists of included studies and review articles and we contacted experts in the field for knowledge of additional studies. We did not impose any restrictions of timer or language. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We searched eight databases and two registers for studies testing laetrile or amygdalin for the treatment of cancer. Two review authors screened and assessed articles for inclusion criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We located over 200 references, 63 were evaluated in the original review and an additional 6 in this update. However, we did not identify any studies that met our inclusion criteria. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The claims that laetrile or amygdalin have beneficial effects for cancer patients are not currently supported by sound clinical data. There is a considerable risk of serious adverse effects from cyanide poisoning after laetrile or amygdalin, especially after oral ingestion. The risk-benefit balance of laetrile or amygdalin as a treatment for cancer is therefore unambiguously negative.

Life-threatening interaction between complementary medicines: cyanide toxicity following ingestion of amygdalin and vitamin C.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a case of severe accidental cyanide poisoning following a single ingestion of amygdalin with therapeutic intent. CASE SUMMARY: A 68-year-old patient with cancer presented to the emergency department shortly after her first dose (3 g) of amygdalin with a reduced Glasgow Coma Score, seizures, and severe lactic acidosis requiring intubation and ventilation. The patient also ingested 4800 mg of vitamin C per day. She responded rapidly to hydroxocobalamin treatment. The adverse drug reaction was rated probable on the Naranjo probability scale. DISCUSSION: Amygdalin and laetrile (a synthetic form of amygdalin) are commonly used as complementary or alternative medicine (CAM) for the treatment of cancer. Vitamin C is known to increase the in vitro conversion of amygdalin to cyanide and reduce body stores of cysteine, which is used to detoxify cyanide. Amygdalin has been used for decades by patients with cancer who are seeking alternative therapies, and severe reactions have not been reported with this dose. An interaction with vitamin C is a plausible explanation for this life-threatening response. CONCLUSIONS: This case highlights the fact that CAMs can produce life-threatening toxicity. This case also adds a further note of caution, namely, the potential for serious interactions between CAMs, particularly where there is no tradition of concomitant use.

Results and lessons from clinical trials using dietary supplements for cancer: direct and indirect investigations.

Randomized controlled trials are generally regarded as the standard of study designs to determine potential causality. The inclusion of a placebo group in these trials, when appropriate, is generally needed to access the efficacy of a drug or dietary supplement. The recent increasing use of dietary supplements and herbal medications by patients makes it imperative to reevaluate the past findings of clinical studies. Several large-scale trials of dietary supplements have been tested in various populations to determine their effect on cancer prevention. Other trials have focused on patients already diagnosed with cancer. In the latter case, it is difficult to involve a placebo because of the serious nature of the disease. Nevertheless, much has been gleaned from these trials directly and indirectly. Overall, when analyzing primary endpoints in these trials, the results have been discouraging and even support the nonuse of certain supplements because of potential adverse effects. Other secondary endpoints in these same trials have revealed some potential encouraging and discouraging data. Individuals who currently qualify for the potential use of dietary supplements for cancer may be restricted to those who have a deficiency in a certain compound despite adequate dietary sources or lifestyle changes. Those individuals with a smoking history or other unhealthy lifestyle seem to have the most to gain or lose from taking certain dietary supplements for cancer. The time seems more than ripe to evaluate past adequate trials with supplements, such as beta-carotene, N-acetyl-cysteine, selenium, shark cartilage, vitamin C, vitamin E, and others. Again, these studies have been disappointing, but they provide insight for the clinician and patient of what to potentially expect when using these supplements for cancer. In addition, indirect trials for other conditions (cardiovascular) may provide future insight into possible results for future cancer prevention trials.

Neuromyopathy of cyanide intoxication due to "laetrile" (amygdalin). A clinicopathologic study.

A 67-year-old woman with lymphoma presented with a neuromyopathy following "laetrile" (amygdalin) treatment. She had significant elevation of blood and urinary thiocyanate and cyanide levels. Sural nerve biopsy specimen revealed a mixed pattern of demyelination and axonal degeneration, the latter being prominent. Gastrocnemius muscle biopsy specimen showed histochemically a mixed pattern of denervation and myopathy with Type II atrophy. It is concluded that cyanide toxicity secondary to laetrile therapy and nutritional deficiency caused the neuromyopathy, as the changes in peripheral nerve are similar to changes described in ataxic polyneuropathy occurring in Nigeria attributed to high cyanide content in the diet and nutritional deficiency. Although this patient received vincristine initially, the development of the neuromyopathy had no temporal relationship to its administration. The clinical profile, as well as peripheral nerve and muscle changes were not similar to either vincristine neuromyopathy or neuromyopathy due to paraneoplastic manifestation of lymphoma. Clinical improvement following discontinuation of "laetrile" by the patient further supports the toxic etiologic results for the neuromyopathy in this patient.

A clinical trial of amygdalin (Laetrile) in the treatment of human cancer.

One hundred seventy-eight patients with cancer were treated with amygdalin (Laetrile) plus a "metabolic therapy" program consisting of diet, enzymes, and vitamins. The great majority of these patients were in good general condition before treatment. None was totally disabled or in preterminal condition. One third had not received any previous chemotherapy. The pharmaceutical preparations of amygdalin, the dosage, and the schedule were representative of past and present Laetrile practice. No substantive benefit was observed in terms of cure, improvement or stabilization of cancer, improvement of symptoms related to cancer, or extension of life span. The hazards of amygdalin therapy were evidenced in several patients by symptoms of cyanide toxicity or by blood cyanide levels approaching the lethal range. Patients exposed to this agent should be instructed about the danger of cyanide poisoning, and their blood cyanide levels should be carefully monitored. Amygdalin (Laetrile) is a toxic drug that is not effective as a cancer treatment.

A pharmacologic and toxicological study of amygdalin.

Six patients with advanced cancer were treated with amygdalin (laetrile) at dosages similar to those employed by laetrile practitioners. Amygdalin given intravenously at 4.5 g/sq m/day was largely excreted unchanged in the urine and produced no clinical or laboratory evidence of toxic reaction. Amygdalin given orally at 0.5 g three times daily produced significant blood cyanide levels to 2.1 microgram/mL. No clinical or laboratory evidence of toxic reaction was seen in the six patients taking oral amygdalin at this dosage. One patient, however, challenged with a large intake of raw almonds, had transient symptoms of cyanide toxic reaction with escalating blood cyanide levels. This small study indicates that amygdalin in the doses employed produces few clinical side effects. A definite hazard of cyanide toxic reaction must be assumed, however, and possible long-term side effects remain unknown.

Knowledge and use of "alternative" cancer therapies in children.

Because of the increased interest in laetrile and other "alternative" cancer therapies among cancer patients and the lack of data concerning knowledge and use of such treatments in childhood cancer, parents of children diagnosed with cancer in 1977 and 1978 at a major pediatric oncology center were surveyed. Eight different "alternative" therapies or groups were known by 50% of parents. Seventeen of 106 children had received an "alternative" cancer treatment. News media were the most frequent initial information source. Accuracy of knowledge of toxic effects of laetrile was poor, with only 26.4% realizing poisoning was possible. Parents who felt desperation in their search for a cure and were looking for an easier treatment method, and those who were dissatisfied with their role in making treatment decisions, appeared at greatest risk of seeking "alternative" therapies. Over 56% of parents wanted more information about cancer and its treatment, with written information favored by almost 40%.