ArticleAvicenna journal of phytomedicine
Antioxidant effects and protective potential of fruit extracts of
Article in Avicenna journal of phytomedicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The integrity of the DNA is continously menaced by the harmful genotoxic compounds. The endogenous system responsible for preserving the DNA integrity, often fails following a massive influx of these genotoxic compounds. Reseaches on exogenous bioactive compounds from fruits and vegetables are necessary. This study was designed to evaluate the free radical scavenging activity and the DNA protection/repair potentiality of the extracts of Materials and Methods: The ability of extracts to trap free radicals was assessed by using the 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH), nitric oxide and hydroxyle radicals quenching assay. The comet assay was performed for evaluating the DNA protection/repair property of extracts to inhibit the DNA oxidative damage induced by arsenic trioxide. Results: All extracts at a final concentration of 50 µg/mL have quenched more than 50% of DPPH, nitric oxide and hydroxyle radicals. Moreover, all extracts have showed good DNA protection/repair activity against the arsenic trioxide-induced DNA oxidative damage compared to arsenic treatment alone (p<0.001). However, methanol fractions have exhibited the best DNA protection/repair activities by reducing considerably DNA fragmentations compared to arsenic treatment (p<0.001). The genoprotective activity of the extracts was positively correlated with their free radical scavenging abilities. Conclusion: The methanol fraction of
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.