ArticleBiologics : targets & therapy2025
Article in Biologics : targets & therapy, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Methods: Aqueous extracts were evaluated for endotoxin contamination and cytotoxicity to ensure suitability for in vitro experimentation. PCR analysis was employed to quantify CYP enzyme gene expression. Computational tools, including Protox-II, Swiss ADME, and molecular docking, were used to assess pharmacokinetics, CYP interactions, and biological targets. Competitive binding assays were performed to investigate the involvement of the constitutive androstane receptor (CAR) in CYP induction. Results: The results suggest that several metabolites, particularly ursodeoxycholic acid and beta-sitosterol, show potential interactions with CYP enzymes, with ursodeoxycholic acid demonstrating the highest probability of biological effects on CYP and a strong binding affinity to the Constitutive Androstane Receptor (CAR). Moreover, a receptor competitive binding assay suggested that the primary mechanism of CYP 2B6 and 3A4 induction is through activation of the CAR receptor although additional confirmatory studies are necessary. Discussion: The observed CYP enzyme induction through CAR receptor activation aligns with USFDA guidelines for CYP studies. However, the hepatotoxic potential of ursodeoxycholic acid and the associated toxicity risks of other metabolites underscore the need for caution. The findings highlight the potential for herb-drug interactions, particularly with pharmaceuticals metabolized by CYP enzymes. Conclusion: In conclusion, there is a potential for interactions between
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.