SynthesisScientific reports2024
Joining up the scattered anticancer knowledge on auraptene and umbelliprenin: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2024. 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.
- Natural simple coumarins and their interaction with AKR1C3: implications for overcoming chemoradioresistance in gastrointestinal carcinomas.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Based In Silico Evaluation of the Pharmacological Potential and In Vitro Anti-Malignancy Effect in the Human Glioblastoma Cell Line of the Hydrate of the Coumarin Compound Meranzin Originating From the Edible Macroalga (Food science & nutrition · 2026Article
- Targeted pancreatic cancer therapy using 4-farnesyloxycoumarin conjugated nanocrystalline cellulose and Chitosan nanoparticles.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Umbelliprenin improved anti-proliferative effects of ionizing radiation on adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma cells via interaction with CDK6; anInternational journal of immunopathology and pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Auraptene (AUR) and umbelliprenin (UMB) are naturally occurring prenylated coumarins that have demonstrated promising anticancer effects across various human cancer cell lines. This meta-analysis aimed to systematically assess, compare, and quantify the anticancer efficacy of AUR and UMB by synthesizing evidence from in vitro studies. A comprehensive literature search identified 27 eligible studies investigating AUR or UMB against cancer cells. Mixed-effects models revealed significant negative associations between coumarin dose and viability for AUR (est. = - 2.27) and UMB (est. = - 3.990), underscoring their dose-dependent cytotoxicity. Meta-regression indicated slightly higher potency for UMB over AUR, potentially due to increased lipophilicity imparted by additional isoprenyl units. Machine learning approaches identified coumarin dose and cancer type as the most influential determinants of toxicity, while treatment duration and the specific coumarin displayed weaker effects. Moderate (AUR) to substantial (UMB) between-study heterogeneity was detected, although the findings proved robust. In summary, this meta-analysis establishes AUR and UMB as promising natural anticancer candidates with clear dose-toxicity relationships across diverse malignancies. The structural insights and quantifications of anticancer efficacy can inform forthcoming efforts assessing therapeutic potential in pre-clinical models and human trials.
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.