Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39021172›Full record

SynthesisCurrent drug safety2025

A Systematic Review of the Impact of Benzimidazole-based Anthelmintics on Lung Cancer in Animal Models.

Aakriti Garg, Mohd Ashif Khan

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current drug safety, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Aakriti GargDepartment of Pharmacology, School of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi, 110062, India.
Mohd Ashif KhanDepartment of Translational & Clinical Research, School of Chemical and Life Sciences, Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi, 110062, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEmerging studies have reported the potential anticancer activity of FDA-approved benzimidazole-based anthelmintics against lung cancer. Therefore, the current systematic review aimed to explore the anticancer activity of benzimidazole-based anthelmintics in lung cancer animal models.

methodThe databases including Pubmed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar were searched till April 2024 for the animal studies evaluating the anticancer activity of benzimidazole-based anthelmintics against lung cancer. The relevant data was extracted in the prepared format in Microsoft Excel. Systematic Review Center for Laboratory Animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) risk of bias (RoB) was used to assess the quality of included studies. The protocol for this study has been registered in PROSPERO (Registration number: CRD42022352141).

resultsInitially, we obtained 4150 articles, and finally eight articles were included in the current study. The information in the included studies was a bit diversified including different benzimidazole- based anthelmintics, dosage, route of administration, and duration of experiments. However, all studies reported that exposure to benzimidazole-based anthelmintics decreased tumor size and tumor volume in animal models of lung cancer.

conclusionIn conclusion, benzimidazole-based anthelmintics have the potential to treat lung cancer. However, more controlled and thorough preclinical studies are required to evaluate its efficacy, safety, and mechanism of anticancer activities.

Indexed as

AnthelminticsAntineoplastic AgentsBenzimidazolesLung NeoplasmsAnimalsDisease Models, AnimalHumansAnthelminticsAntineoplastic AgentsbenzimidazoleBenzimidazolesanimal modelsAnticancerbenzimidazole-based anthelminticsefficacylung cancernon-small cell lung carcinomaNSCLCpreclinicalsafety.systematic review

Identifiers

PMID39021172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.