Inhibition of Prostate Cancer-Cell Proliferation by Essiac®
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the ability of Essiac tea extracts (Essiac Canada International, Ottawa, Canada) to modulate cancer cell proliferation and immune responsiveness. DESIGN: A noncancerous transformed cell line was compared to a cancerous cell line and spleen cells that had been isolated from mice to examine proliferation responses mediated by the addition of an Essiac preparation. RESULTS: We found in vitro evidence of decreased proliferation of both noncancerous transformed (CHO) and cancerous prostate cell line (LNCaP) when Essiac was present in the culture media. A dose response for inhibition was demonstrated by a linear regression performed on the data for both the CHO and LNCaP cells. The percent inhibition of the LNCaP cells was higher than the percent inhibition of the CHO cells suggesting that Essiac may have a more selective effect on cancer cells than transformed cells. In addition, the effects of Essiac were examined in an immune T-lymphocyte proliferation assay. At low doses of Essiac, augmentation of proliferation of these T cells was demonstrated, but at higher doses Essiac was inhibitory to T-cell proliferation. The same doses of Essiac that stimulated spleen cells were inhibitory for LNCaP cell proliferation. CONCLUSIONS: Essiac preparations may be able to inhibit tumor cell growth while enhancing immune response to antigenic stimulation. This may be especially valuable in immune-suppressed individuals.
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".