Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21372038›Full record

Trial reportCancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)2011

Bioavailability of Sulforaphane from two broccoli sprout beverages: results of a short-term, cross-over clinical trial in Qidong, China.

Patricia A Egner, Jian Guo Chen, Jin Bing Wang, Yan Wu, Yan Sun, Jian Hua Lu, Jian Zhu, Yong Hui Zhang, Yong Sheng Chen, Marlin D Friesen and 12 more

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readClinical TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 113 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
113citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01437501 phase2completednot on this map

Broccoli Sprout Intervention in Qidong, P.R. China

TypeinterventionalSponsorJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthRan2011 to 2012Enrolled291ConditionsEnvironmental CarcinogenesisArmsBroccoli Sprout Extract Beverage, placebo beverage
NCT03730649 early_phase1active not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Effect of Topical Sulforaphane on Skin Aging and With Ultraviolet and Visible Light Exposure

TypeinterventionalSponsorJohns Hopkins UniversityRan2019 to 2026Enrolled12ConditionsSkin AgingArmsSulforaphane (broccoli sprout extract), UV or visible light
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

113 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 195 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Prevention of Carcinogen-Induced Oral Cancer by Sulforaphane.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2016
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Sulforaphane treatment of autism spectrum disorder (ASD).Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014
    Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Urinary 3,3'-diindolylmethane: a biomarker of glucobrassicin exposure and indole-3-carbinol uptake in humans.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2014
    Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

53 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Patricia A EgnerDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Jian Guo Chen
Jin Bing Wang
Yan Wu
Yan Sun
Jian Hua Lu
Jian Zhu
Yong Hui Zhang
Yong Sheng Chen
Marlin D Friesen
Lisa P Jacobson
Alvaro Muñoz
Derek Ng
Geng Sun Qian
Yuan Rong Zhu
Tao Yang Chen
Nigel P Botting
Qingzhi Zhang
Jed W Fahey
Paul Talalay
John D Groopman
Thomas W Kensler
Johns Hopkins University · USQidong Liver Cancer Prevention Research · CNUniversity of Pittsburgh · USUniversity of St Andrews · GB

Funding

PILOT STUDY--ACID FOG, AN EXPERIMENTAL MODELP30ES003819 · NIEHS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI GROOPMAN, JOHN D · 1985 to 2012
$22.6M
Validation and Application of Risk, Biomarkers in Human StudiesP01ES006052 · NIEHS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI GROOPMAN, JOHN D · 1993 to 2012
$22.6M
Isolation &Evaluation of Anticarcinogenic GlucosinolateR01CA093780 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI TALALAY, PAUL · 2002 to 2011
$2.9M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA093780NCI NIH HHS R01 CA93780NIEHS NIH HHS ES003819NIEHS NIH HHS P01 ES006052NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES003819
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of several challenges in design of clinical chemoprevention trials is the selection of the dose, formulation, and dose schedule of the intervention agent. Therefore, a cross-over clinical trial was undertaken to compare the bioavailability and tolerability of sulforaphane from two of broccoli sprout-derived beverages: one glucoraphanin-rich (GRR) and the other sulforaphane-rich (SFR). Sulforaphane was generated from glucoraphanin contained in GRR by gut microflora or formed by treatment of GRR with myrosinase from daikon (Raphanus sativus) sprouts to provide SFR. Fifty healthy, eligible participants were requested to refrain from crucifer consumption and randomized into two treatment arms. The study design was as follows: 5-day run-in period, 7-day administration of beverages, 5-day washout period, and 7-day administration of the opposite intervention. Isotope dilution mass spectrometry was used to measure levels of glucoraphanin, sulforaphane, and sulforaphane thiol conjugates in urine samples collected daily throughout the study. Bioavailability, as measured by urinary excretion of sulforaphane and its metabolites (in approximately 12-hour collections after dosing), was substantially greater with the SFR (mean = 70%) than with GRR (mean = 5%) beverages. Interindividual variability in excretion was considerably lower with SFR than with GRR beverage. Elimination rates were considerably slower with GRR, allowing for achievement of steady-state dosing as opposed to bolus dosing with SFR. Optimal dosing formulations in future studies should consider blends of sulforaphane and glucoraphanin as SFR and GRR mixtures to achieve peak concentrations for activation of some targets and prolonged inhibition of others implicated in the protective actions of sulforaphane. Cancer Prev Res; 4(3); 384-95. ©2011 AACR.

Indexed as

BeveragesAdultAgedAnticarcinogenic AgentsBiological AvailabilityBrassicaChinaCross-Over StudiesFemaleGenotypeGlucosinolatesGlycoside HydrolasesHumansImidoestersIsothiocyanatesMaleAnticarcinogenic AgentsglucoraphaninGlucosinolatesGlycoside HydrolasesImidoestersIsothiocyanatesOximesSulfhydryl CompoundssulforaphaneSulfoxidesThiocyanatesthioglucosidase

Identifiers

PMID21372038
PMCPMC3076202
OpenAlexW2096771598

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.