ArticleScientific reports2025
Anticancer properties of Cirsium vulgare (Savi) ten. Dry extracts from different plant parts and phenological stages of Raw material collection.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study explores the anticancer potential of Cirsium vulgare dry extracts in human colorectal adenocarcinoma (HT-29) and gastric carcinoma (KATO III) cell lines using both traditional 2D monolayer models and advanced 3D spheroid systems. Cell viability was assessed via the MTT assay, while the influence on cell migration was evaluated using a wound-healing assay. In 3D cultures, extract activity was further examined through magnetic 3D bioprinting to monitor spheroid growth dynamics, and viability of cells in spheroids was assessed by the WST-1 assay. Among the tested extracts, those derived from C. vulgare inflorescences (U1) and roots (U6, U7, U8, U9) demonstrated higher anticancer activity. The inflorescence extract (U1) exhibited the highest cytotoxic activity against both cancer cell lines, while root-derived extracts, particularly U7, showed potent suppression of HT-29 cell migration, achieving the most significant reduction in wound closure after 36 h (p < 0.05) at a concentration of 0.2 mg/mL. In spheroid models, U1 and U8 extracts reduced HT-29 cancer cell viability by 53.3-77.9% and 56.7-81.5%, respectively, and U1 emerged as the most effective inhibitor of spheroid growth, reducing diameter by 7-10%, compared to untreated controls. These findings underscore the promising anticancer activity of C. vulgare extracts, particularly U1 and U8, highlighting their potential as innovative therapeutic candidates for treating colorectal and gastric cancers. Further investigations are warranted to refine their application in oncological research.
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.