Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31590459›Full record

ReviewMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2019

Broccoli or Sulforaphane: Is It the Source or Dose That Matters?

Yoko Yagishita, Jed W Fahey, Albena T Dinkova-Kostova, Thomas W Kensler

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 169 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
169citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

169 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 324 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

109 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Yoko YagishitaTranslational Research Program, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA 98109, USA. yyagishi@fredhutch.org.
Jed W FaheyDepartment of Medicine, Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. jfahey@jhmi.edu.
Albena T Dinkova-KostovaDepartment of Pharmacology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. A.DinkovaKostova@dundee.ac.uk.
Thomas W KenslerTranslational Research Program, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA 98109, USA. tkensler@fredhutch.org.
Fred Hutch Cancer Center · USJohns Hopkins Medicine · USJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Targeting Nrf2 for Cancer ChemopreventionR35CA197222 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI KENSLER, THOMAS W · 2015 to 2021
$6.7M
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/L01923X/1Cancer Research UK 18644Cancer Research UK C20953/A18644NCI NIH HHS R35 CA197222NIH HHS R35 CA197222
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is robust epidemiological evidence for the beneficial effects of broccoli consumption on health, many of them clearly mediated by the isothiocyanate sulforaphane. Present in the plant as its precursor, glucoraphanin, sulforaphane is formed through the actions of myrosinase, a β-thioglucosidase present in either the plant tissue or the mammalian microbiome. Since first isolated from broccoli and demonstrated to have cancer chemoprotective properties in rats in the early 1990s, over 3000 publications have described its efficacy in rodent disease models, underlying mechanisms of action or, to date, over 50 clinical trials examining pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and disease mitigation. This review evaluates the current state of knowledge regarding the relationships between formulation (e.g., plants, sprouts, beverages, supplements), bioavailability and efficacy, and the doses of glucoraphanin and/or sulforaphane that have been used in pre-clinical and clinical studies. We pay special attention to the challenges for better integration of animal model and clinical studies, particularly with regard to selection of dose and route of administration. More effort is required to elucidate underlying mechanisms of action and to develop and validate biomarkers of pharmacodynamic action in humans. A sobering lesson is that changes in approach will be required to implement a public health paradigm for dispensing benefit across all spectrums of the global population.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnti-Infective AgentsAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicBiomarkers, TumorBrassicaClinical Trials as TopicHumansIsothiocyanatesMolecular StructurePlant ExtractsSulfoxidesAnti-Infective AgentsAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicBiomarkers, TumorIsothiocyanatesPlant ExtractssulforaphaneSulfoxidesallometric scalingbroccolichemoprotectionclinical trialsglucoraphaninmyrosinaseNrf2sulforaphanetoxicity

Identifiers

PMID31590459
PMCPMC6804255
OpenAlexW2978930973

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.