The burden of neoplastic diseases is a significant global health challenge accounting for thousands of deaths. In Uganda, about 32,617 cancer cases were reported in 2018, accompanied by 21,829 deaths. In a view to identify some potential anticancer plant candidates for possible drug development, the current study was designed to compile the inventory of plants with reported anticancer activity used in rural Uganda and the evidences supporting their use in cancer therapy. An electronic survey in multidisciplinary databases revealed that 29 plant species belonging to 28 genera distributed among 24 families have been reported to be used in the management of cancer in Uganda. Anticancer plants were majorly from the families Bignoniaceae (7%), Caricaceae (7%), Fabaceae (7%), Moraceae (7%), and Rutaceae (7%). Most species occur in the wild (52%), though some are cultivated (48%). The growth habit of the plants is as trees (55%) or herbs (45%). Anticancer extracts are usually prepared from leaves (29%), bark (24%), roots (21%), and fruits (13%) through decoctions (53%), as food spices (23%) or pounded to produce ointments that are applied topically (10%). Prunus africana (Hook.f.) Kalkman, Opuntia species, Albizia coriaria (Welw. ex Oliver), Daucus carota L., Cyperus alatus (Nees) F. Muell., Markhamia lutea (Benth.) K. Schum., and Oxalis corniculata L. were the most frequently encountered species. As per global reports, Allium sativum L., Annona muricata L., Carica papaya L., Moringa oleifera Lam., Opuntia species, Prunus africana (Hook.f.) Kalkman, and Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Don. are the most studied species, with the latter having vincristine and vinblastine anticancer drugs developed from it. Prostate, cervical, breast, and skin cancers are the top traditionally treated malignancies. There is a need to isolate and evaluate the anticancer potential of the bioactive compounds in the unstudied claimed plants, such as Cyperus alatus (Nees) F. Muell., Ficus dawei Hutch., Ficus natalensis Hochst., and Lovoa trichilioides Harms, and elucidate their mechanism of anticancer activity.

No abstract

BackgroundEmpirical evidence on the link between agrobiodiversity and dietary diversity appears to be inconclusive. Thus, there arises a need to determine other factors that could significantly influence dietary diversity in different agro-ecological zones, as factors may vary from region to region.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to document the status of agrobiodiversity and dietary diversity and to assess the determinants of dietary diversity among women of reproductive age in two different agro-ecological zones of Rongai Sub-County in Kenya.DesignA cross-sectional study of 384 women aged 18–49 years was conducted. Agrobiodiversity was measured using the Shannon-Wiener index, species richness (count) and production diversity score. A 24-hour dietary recall was used to determine minimum dietary diversity for women (MDD-W) of reproductive age.ResultsAlthough the level of agrobiodiversity was different between the low and high agro-ecological zones (using Shannon-Wiener index); the women’s dietary diversity was not different (p > 0.05) between low (3.78 ± 0.99) and high potential areas (3.84 ± 1.05). In multivariate logistic regression, there was no association (p > 0.05) between agrobiodiversity indicators and dietary diversity across the two agricultural zones. Factors influencing MDD-W in two agricultural zones were different. In low potential areas, woman’s education level positively determined dietary diversity, while in high potential areas household gender, woman’s education level, woman’s age and family size influenced MDD-W.ConclusionThe proportion of women who met minimum dietary diversity was low. Although agrobiodiversity was different in the two agro-ecological zones, women’s dietary diversity scores were similar. In low agricultural potential areas, only education level influenced women’s dietary diversity while household gender, education level, age and family size were the important determinants in high agricultural potential areas. Therefore, it is recommended that nutrition interventions focusing on lessening malnutrition and improving dietary quality should pay special attention to differences in agro-ecological zones to develop region-specific interventions instead of generalizing interventions.

No abstract

No abstract