Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41671218›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Comparative inhibitory effects of zeolite, sepiolite, and kaolinite on A549 lung cancer cells.

Fariba Nemati Shamsabad, Mohammad Hassan Salehi, Jalaleddin Shams, Tooba Ghazanfari

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Fariba Nemati ShamsabadSoil Science Department, College of Agriculture, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran.
Mohammad Hassan SalehiSoil Science Department, College of Agriculture, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5322-3078
Jalaleddin ShamsDepartment of Oncology and Hematology, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran.
Tooba GhazanfariImmunoregultion Research Center, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClays, by their unique structure, due to reduction in the acidity of blood and the surrounding environment, crystalline structure, pores, channels, and variations in microporosity significantly influence cellular growth. This study intends to examine the inhibitory effect of zeolite, sepiolite, and kaolinite on the human lung adenocarcinoma cell line (A549) in comparison to PBMCs (peripheral blood mononuclear cells) as representative cells of the immune system.

methodsThe cytotoxic effect of zeolite, sepiolite, and kaolinite was assessed using cell viability assay, comparing responses in cancerous A549 cells and non-cancerous peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) to determine selective toxicity.

resultsOur results demonstrate that all three clays significantly decreased A549 cell viability in a dose- and time-dependent manner, while exhibiting minimal cytotoxicity toward PBMCs. The IC50 values were calculated as follows: 0.34 mg/mL for zeolite, 0.06 mg/mL for kaolinite, and 0.09 mg/mL for sepiolite.

conclusionThese findings suggest a degree of selective anticancer activity, positioning these clay minerals as promising candidates for further development as adjunct or alternative anticancer agents.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsKaolinLung NeoplasmsMagnesium SilicatesZeolitesA549 CellsCell Line, TumorCell ProliferationCell SurvivalHumansLeukocytes, MononuclearAntineoplastic AgentsKaolinMagnesium Silicatesmagnesium trisilicateZeolites

Identifiers

PMID41671218
PMCPMC12893588

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.