ArticleRSC advances2024
Investigating the anti-inflammatory potential of
Article in RSC advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inflammation is a complex process with many contributing factors, and it often causes pain. The pathophysiology of pain involves the release of inflammatory mediators that initiate pain sensation, as well as edema and other inflammation hallmarks. Selenium-containing compounds (OSe) are very promising for developing new medicines because they can treat many different diseases. In this study, we estimated the anti-inflammatory properties of maleanilic and succinanilic acids containing selenium (OSe). These molecules were designed by combining different strategies to enhance their anti-inflammatory properties. Hence, the anti-inflammatory impacts of compounds 8, 9, 10, and 11 were pursued using inflammatory markers COX-2, IL-1β, and IL-6. Notably, it was revealed that compounds 8, 9, 10, and 11 downregulated COX-2, IL-1β, and IL-6 by (2.01, 1.63, 2.26, and 2.05), (1.42, 1.64, 1.93, and 2.59), and (1.67, 2.54, 2.22, and 4.06)-fold changes, respectively. Moreover, molecular docking studies were conducted on compounds 8, 9, 10, and 11 to pursue their binding affinities for the COX-2 enzyme. Notably, very promising binding scores of compounds 8, 9, 10, and 11 towards the binding site of the COX-2 receptor were attained. Additionally, more accurate molecular dynamics simulations were performed for 200 ns for the docked complexes of compounds 8, 9, 10, and 11 to confirm the molecular docking findings, which ignore the protein's flexibility. Therefore, the exact stability of the
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.