Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25532034›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Benefits and risks of the hormetic effects of dietary isothiocyanates on cancer prevention.

Yongping Bao, Wei Wang, Zhigang Zhou, Changhao Sun

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Plant-Derived Anti-Cancer Therapeutics and Biopharmaceuticals.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Sulforaphane and ophthalmic diseases.Food science & nutrition · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Roles of Phytochemicals in Cancer Prevention and Therapeutics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Sulforaphane Impact on Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) in Bladder Carcinoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Nutrients · 2020
    Review
  20. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Yongping BaoNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, United Kingdom.
Wei WangNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, United Kingdom.
Zhigang ZhouNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, United Kingdom; Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Affiliated hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, P. R. China.
Changhao SunSchool of Public Health, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, Heilongjiang, P. R. China.
University of East Anglia · GBHarbin Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The isothiocyanate (ITC) sulforaphane (SFN) was shown at low levels (1-5 µM) to promote cell proliferation to 120-143% of the controls in a number of human cell lines, whilst at high levels (10-40 µM) it inhibited such cell proliferation. Similar dose responses were observed for cell migration, i.e. SFN at 2.5 µM increased cell migration in bladder cancer T24 cells to 128% whilst high levels inhibited cell migration. This hormetic action was also found in an angiogenesis assay where SFN at 2.5 µM promoted endothelial tube formation (118% of the control), whereas at 10-20 µM it caused significant inhibition. The precise mechanism by which SFN influences promotion of cell growth and migration is not known, but probably involves activation of autophagy since an autophagy inhibitor, 3-methyladenine, abolished the effect of SFN on cell migration. Moreover, low doses of SFN offered a protective effect against free-radical mediated cell death, an effect that was enhanced by co-treatment with selenium. These results suggest that SFN may either prevent or promote tumour cell growth depending on the dose and the nature of the target cells. In normal cells, the promotion of cell growth may be of benefit, but in transformed or cancer cells it may be an undesirable risk factor. In summary, ITCs have a biphasic effect on cell growth and migration. The benefits and risks of ITCs are not only determined by the doses, but are affected by interactions with Se and the measured endpoint.

Indexed as

Caco-2 CellsCell Line, TumorCell MovementCell ProliferationDietary SupplementsEndotheliumHep G2 CellsHumansHuman Umbilical Vein Endothelial CellsIsothiocyanatesNeoplasmsNeovascularization, PhysiologicNF-E2-Related Factor 2Oxidative StressRisk AssessmentSeleniumIsothiocyanatesNFE2L2 protein, humanNF-E2-Related Factor 2Selenium

Identifiers

PMID25532034
PMCPMC4273949
OpenAlexW2077777548

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.