ArticleScientific reports2025
Investigating C
Article in Scientific reports, 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
Abstract
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a significant global health challenge, with drug therapy being a critical treatment approach. However, the development of drug resistance and the occurrence of adverse reactions to existing medications have made the creation of new HCC treatments urgent. Tetrandrine, a bisbenzylisoquinoline alkaloid from natural products, has shown great potential in this area. Yet, systematic comparative studies on different tetrandrine modification sites (such as C-7 and C-14) are lacking, which has hindered the simultaneous optimization of its antitumor activity and synthetic feasibility. In this study, we focused on a C-7 modification strategy and designed and synthesized 38 novel tetrandrine sulfonate derivatives (including 31 new compounds) through an efficient one-step reaction. The in vitro antiproliferative activities of these derivatives were evaluated against four HCC cell lines (HepG-2, SMMC-7721, SK-Hep-1, and QGY-7701), and a systematic comparison with previously reported C-14 sulfonate derivatives was conducted. The results showed that all the C-7 derivatives exhibited good antiproliferative activities against HCC. Notably, compound 15 demonstrated significant antiproliferative activity against all tested cell lines, with IC
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.