Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41244630›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in toxicology2025

Developing an approach for evaluating the cardiotoxic potential of botanicals.

Julie Krzykwa, Hemantkumar S Chaudhari, Andre Monteiro Da Rocha, Matthias Gossmann, Peter Hoffmann, Yaser Khokhar, Nathan Meyer, Jin-Young K Park, Robert Sprando, Ravi Vaidyanathan and 5 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in toxicology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Julie KrzykwaHealth and Environmental Sciences Institute, Washington, DC, United States.
Hemantkumar S ChaudhariL'Oréal Research and Innovation, Clark, NJ, United States.
Andre Monteiro Da RochaFrankel Cardiovascular Center Cell Regeneration Core/Internal Medicine-Cardiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.
Matthias GossmanninnoVitro GmbH, Juelich, Germany.
Peter HoffmannConsultant, Beaufort, SC, United States.
Yaser KhokharStanford Cardiovascular Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.
Nathan MeyerFUJIFILM Cellular Dynamics, Inc., Madison, WI, United States.
Jin-Young K ParkFood and Drug Administration, Human Foods Program, Office of Food Chemical Safety Dietary Supplements and Innovation, College Park, MD, United States.
Robert SprandoFood and Drug Administration, Human Foods Program, Office of Chemistry and Toxicology, Laurel, MD, United States.
Ravi VaidyanathanFUJIFILM Cellular Dynamics, Inc., Madison, WI, United States.
Remco H S WesterinkNeurotoxicology Research Group, Division of Toxicology, Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences (IRAS), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Joseph C WuStanford Cardiovascular Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.
Jeffrey YourickFood and Drug Administration, Human Foods Program, Office of Chemistry and Toxicology, Laurel, MD, United States.
Shane R ZhaoStanford Cardiovascular Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.
Constance A MitchellHealth and Environmental Sciences Institute, Washington, DC, United States.

Funding

Toxicological Assessments for the National Toxicology ProgramZIAES103316 · NIEHS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES · PI WALKER, NIGEL J · 2016 to 2019
$31.9M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA ES103316
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Botanicals (e.g., extracts derived from plants, algae, or fungi) are increasingly utilized by consumers with the hope of enhancing their health, managing symptoms, or preventing ailments; however, these products have often had limited pre-market toxicity testing. Traditional toxicity testing (e.g., rodent testing) is complicated by the nature of botanicals as complex mixtures and the potential for lot-to-lot variability in chemical constituents. Cardiotoxicity is a key area of concern, as adverse effects on the cardiovascular system can have severe consequences, and although not commonly reported, there have been reports of adverse cardiac events. New approach methodologies (NAMs) offer human-relevant, efficient, innovative, and cost-effective solutions for evaluating the cardiotoxicity of botanicals. The Botanical Safety Consortium (BSC) was established to focus on identifying suitable NAMs to screen for potential toxicities associated with these widely used products. This manuscript outlines the BSC Cardiotoxicity Working Group's approach for evaluating NAMs for assessing the potential cardiotoxicity of botanicals. These NAMs leverage

Indexed as

botanicalsbotanical safety consortiumcardiotoxicitycomplex mixturesin vitronew approach methods

Identifiers

PMID41244630
PMCPMC12611899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.