<i>Ginkgo biloba</i> extract potentiates human vitamin D receptor‐mediated increase in CYP2B6 reporter activity by 1α,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D <sub>3</sub> (1141.8)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vitamin D receptor (VDR) regulates the expression of a broad array of genes, including those involved in drug biotransformation (e.g. CYP2B6). Ginkgo biloba extract induces CYP2B6, but it is not known whether it activates VDR. Therefore, we characterized the effect of G. biloba extract on human VDR (hVDR) activity. As assessed in a cell‐based dual‐luciferase reporter gene assay, G. biloba extract did not activate hVDR in cells transfected with a hVDR expression plasmid and a CYP2B6‐PBREM/XREM reporter plasmid. In contrast, 1α,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D 3 , which is a hVDR agonist, increased it by 16‐fold compared to the vehicle‐treated group. The combination of G. biloba extract and 1α,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D 3 further increased hVDR activity by another 14‐fold (i.e. 225‐fold increase compared to the vehicle‐treated group). This potentiation effect was evident in multiple lots of G. biloba extract and with other VDR agonists (i.e. lithocholic acid and 9‐cis retinoic acid), and it increased as the concentration of the extract or 1α,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D 3 increased. In contrast, the potentiation did not occur when cells were transfected with a plasmid expressing human constitutive androstane receptor, human pregnane X receptor, or mouse VDR. Overall, the findings indicate that G. biloba extract potentiates hVDR‐mediated CYP2B6 reporter activity. Grant Funding Source : Supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Michael Smith Fdn. for Health Res.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".