ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Plant Propagation to Anticancer Activity: Phytochemical and Biological Evaluation of Water Extracts ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Mechanism of β‑sitosterol in treating keloids: Network pharmacology, molecular docking and experimental verification.Molecular medicine reports · 2025Article
- Chinese herbal medicines: the modifier of hepatocellular carcinoma targeting Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Unveiling the Mechanism of the ChaiShao Shugan Formula Against Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.Drug design, development and therapy · 2024Article
- Phytochemical Study ofMetabolites · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is distinguished by early recurrence and metastases, a high proclivity for treatment resistance, and a lack of targeted medicines, highlighting the importance of developing innovative therapeutic techniques. Methods: First, we used clonogenic, cell viability, flow cytometry, and Transwell assays to assess the effect of SCH on TNBC. Bioinformatic studies, especially network pharmacology-based analysis and RNA sequencing analysis, were performed to investigate the constituents of SCH and its molecular mechanisms in the suppression of TNBC. High-performance liquid chromatography and thin-layer chromatography were used to identify two major components, quercetin and β-sitosterol. Then, we discovered the synergistic cytotoxicity of quercetin and β-sitosterol and assessed their synergistic prevention of cell migration and invasion. Breast cancer xenografts were also created using MDA-MB-231 cells to test the synergistic therapeutic impact of quercetin and β-sitosterol on TNBC Results: Our findings showed that SCH decreased TNBC cell growth, migration, and invasion while also inducing cell death. We identified quercetin and β-sitosterol as the core active components of SCH based on a network pharmacology study. According to RNA sequencing research, the p53 signaling pathway is also regarded as a critical biological mechanism of SCH treatment. The comet assay consistently showed that SCH significantly increased DNA damage in TNBC cells. Our Conclusion: The current study provides novel insight into the previously unknown therapeutic potential of SCH as a DNA-damaging agent in TNBC.
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.