Journal of Pharmaceutical Research International

Background: Cervical cancer is a serious global health concern, and conventional therapies are frequently linked to significant adverse consequences. For example, cisplatin is the most commonly used conventional chemotherapeutic drug but it will cause serious nephrotoxicity, Hearing loss, Bone marrow depression etc. This example indicates the research gap, that illustrate the chemotherapeutic drug causes severe toxicity. So that our review work fills the research gap by shows that the natural substances have shown promising anticancer effects and it is best substitute for conventional chemotherapeutic drugs. There is a number of in vitro experiments, making them viable substitutes or supplements to conventional therapies in recent years.

Objective: The aims of this narrative review are to investigate the anticancer effects of various natural compounds on cervical cancer, specifically HeLa and SiHa cell lines. These compounds include carvacrol, apigenin, gallic acid, naringin, resveratrol, sesamin, piperine, ellagic acid, genistein, and thymoquinone.

Methods: An extensive review of the scientific literature was conducted on Google scholar, Pubmed, EMBASE databases by using free text form such as cervical cancer, phytoconstituents, phytochemicals, phytocompounds and herbal drug for emphasising on studies that examined the anticancer properties of the selected compounds in cervical cancer models between the time period 2010 and 2024. The mechanisms of action, including activation of apoptosis, the regulation of the cell cycle, and modulation of key signalling pathways, were investigated.

Results: The compounds discussed exhibited various anticancer effects, such as inhibition of cell proliferation, induction of apoptosis, suppression of migration and invasion, and modulation of several cancer-associated signaling pathways (e.g., PI3K/AKT, NF-κB, mTOR/STAT3). Some compounds, such as apigenin and gallic acid, demonstrated synergistic effects when combined with conventional chemotherapies, suggesting potential for enhancing therapeutic efficacy.

Conclusion: Natural bioactive compounds show significant promise as therapeutic agents for cervical cancer treatment. Although most studies are preclinical, these compounds could serve as effective adjuncts or alternatives to conventional therapies, offering benefits such as lower toxicity and enhanced efficacy. Further clinical investigations are needed to validate their therapeutic potential in vivo.