ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2024
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring the Nutraceutical Potential ofFood science & nutrition · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: Doxorubicin (Dox) is a potent anticancer medication. However, due to nephrotoxicity, its clinical application is restricted. Materials and methods: The rats were assigned randomly to six groups, including a control group, Dox group (5 mg/kg/week via i.p. for 4 weeks), two groups receiving AME (100 or 200 mg/kg, orally for 28 days), and the last two groups receiving Dox + AME (100 or 200 mg/kg, orally for 4 weeks). After the treatment period concluded, samples of blood and renal tissue were collected for analysis. Serum creatinine, urea, and uric acid levels were used to determine nephrotoxicity biochemically. In renal tissue samples, superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase, glutathione (GSH), glutathione peroxidase (GPx), total antioxidant capacity (TAC), nitric oxide (NOx), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β), and nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) were measured. Histopathological analysis of the kidneys was also performed. Results: Dox caused a considerable increase in kidney function parameters and the occurrence of histological changes, which were significantly reversed by AME treatment. Mechanistically, Dox caused renal oxidative stress by raising malondialdehyde and NOx levels while lowering SOD, GSH, GPx, and TAC. It also caused inflammation via the stimulation of proinflammatory cytokines in renal tissues. Conversely, the treatment of AME mitigated Dox-evoked abnormalities in the above-mentioned tests. Conclusion: AME could protect against nephrotoxicity caused by Dox by reducing oxidative stress, stimulating antioxidant mechanisms, and suppressing proinflammatory cytokines, suggesting that AME may be useful as an adjuvant therapy for Dox-induced nephrotoxicity.
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.