Antitumor Activity of Balsam Fir Oil: Production of Reactive Oxygen Species Induced by α-Humulene as Possible Mechanism of Action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The antitumor activity of the essential oil of Abies balsamea (balsam fir oil) was evaluated against several solid tumor cell lines including MCF-7, PC-3, A-549, DLD-1, M4BEU and CT-26. Balsam fir oil was found to be active against all the solid tumor cell lines tested, with GI 50 values ranging between 0.76 and 1.7 mg/mL. The oil was analyzed by GC-MS and the cytotoxicity of each oil constituent was determined. Balsam fir oil is essentially constituted of monoterpenes tau; 96 %) and some sesquiterpenes. All the compounds tested were inactive (tau; 250 microM) except for alpha-humulene (GI50 = 55 to 73 microM) which thus seems responsible for the cytotoxicity of the oil. We also tested the cytotoxicity of caryophyllene oxide, which proved inactive, and gamma-caryophyllene which was found to be active against all solid tumor cell lines tested. We evaluated the effects of balsam fir oil and alpha-humulene on the cellular glutathione (GSH) content and on the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Balsam fir oil and alpha-humulene induced a dose- and time-dependent decrease in cellular GSH content and an increase in ROS production. These results suggest that GSH depletion and ROS production may be implicated in the cytotoxicity of alpha-humulene and balsam fir oil.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".