SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2023
Efficacy and tolerability of sulforaphane in the therapeutic management of cancers: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Prevention instead of remediation-screening, lifestyle factors, and prostate care 2.0-transition of urology to healthcare coach : Holistic approach to prostate health].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Natural Products in Cancer Research: Mechanistic Advances, Translational Challenges, and the Emerging Role of Chilean Biodiversity.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Isothiocyanates as Multi-Target Natural Compounds in Leukemia: Mechanisms, Selectivity, and Therapeutic Potential.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- The Chemopreventive and Anticancer Potential of Glucosinolates and Their Hydrolysis Products from Cruciferous Vegetables.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Sulforaphane in Cancer Prevention and Therapy: A State-of-the-Art Review of Epidemiological Evidence, Molecular Mechanisms, and Translational Challenges.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Organosulfur compounds as dual-action agents: a critical review of antimicrobial and immunomodulatory potentials, and translational barriers.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- The role of Keap1-Nrf2 signaling pathway in the treatment of respiratory diseases and the research progress on targeted drugs.Heliyon · 2024Review
- Phytochemicals in Cancer Chemoprevention: Preclinical and Clinical Studies.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This paper presents a systematic review aimed at assessing the therapeutic potential of sulforaphane (SFN) in the treatment of diverse cancer types. Methods: Following Cochrane guidelines for systematic reviews, we conducted an exhaustive search of electronic databases up to May 12, 2023, encompassing PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Natural Medicines, ProQuest, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP. Studies were included if they were human-based RCTs involving cancer patients where SFN was the primary experimental treatment. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs (RoB2) was used for quality assessment. Results: Eight studies investigating the efficacy and safety of SFN in prostate cancer (PCa), breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, and melanoma were identified and included in the review. The dosing regimens were variable and inconsistent across the studies. SFN treatment led to statistically significant alterations in several vital genes and histological biomarkers across the studies. However, it did not impact some other key genes. Although not statistically significant, SFN improved overall survival in pancreatic cancer patients. The results on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) were inconsistent in PCa. None of the studies reported significant differences between SFN and comparative controls in terms of adverse events. Conclusion: SFN has emerged as a promising and safe therapeutic agent for diverse cancer types. Nevertheless, the high levels of methodological and clinical heterogeneity across the included studies precluded the possibility of conducting meta-analyses. Further robust clinical investigations to conclusively ascertain the chemotherapeutic potential of SFN in the management of various cancer forms are needed. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022323788, identifier CRD42022323788.
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.