ReviewGenes and environment : the official journal of the Japanese Environmental Mutagen Society2021
Cancer interception by interceptor molecules: mechanistic, preclinical and human translational studies with chlorophylls.
Review in Genes and environment : the official journal of the Japanese Environmental Mutagen Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeted Chemical Monitoring and Integrated Preclinical Evaluation of Zishui Qinggan Yin in 4-NQO-Induced Esophageal Precancer: Histopathological and PI3K/AKT/mTOR-Associated Changes.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Bioactive nutraceuticals as G4 stabilizers: potential cancer prevention and therapy-a critical review.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2024Review
- Green Cancer Prevention and Beyond.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2024Review
- Could chlorophyllins improve the safety profile of beta-d-N4-hydroxycytidine versus N-hydroxycytidine, the active ingredient of the SARS-CoV-2 antiviral molnupiravir?Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Before 'cancer interception' was first advocated, 'interceptor molecules' had been conceived as a sub-category of preventive agents that interfered with the earliest initiation steps in carcinogenesis. Three decades ago, a seminal review cataloged over fifty synthetic agents and natural products that were known or putative interceptor molecules. Chlorophylls and their derivatives garnered much interest based on the potent antimutagenic activity in the Salmonella assay, and the subsequent mechanistic work that provided proof-of-concept for direct molecular complexes with planar aromatic carcinogens. As the 'interceptor molecule' hypothesis evolved, mechanistic experiments and preclinical studies supported the view that chlorophylls can interact with environmental heterocyclic amines, aflatoxins, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons to limit their uptake and bioavailability in vivo. Support also came from human translational studies involving ultralow dose detection in healthy volunteers, as well as intervention in at-risk subjects. Antimutagenic and antigenotoxic effects of natural and synthetic chlorophylls against small alkylating agents also highlighted the fact that non-interceptor mechanisms existed. This gave impetus to investigations broadly related to free radical scavenging, anti-inflammatory effects, immune modulation and photodynamic therapy. Therapeutic aspects of chlorophylls also were investigated, with evidence for cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in human cancer cells. As the science has evolved, new mechanistic leads continue to support the use and development of chlorophylls and their porphyrin derivatives for cancer interception, beyond the initial interest as interceptor molecules.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.