Studies on the Chemopreventive Effect of Carnitine on Tumorigenesis In Vivo, Using Two Experimental Murine Models of Colon Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carnitine is known for its essential role in intermediary metabolism. In vitro studies suggest that its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties are potentially beneficial toward cancer prevention. This study tested effects of carnitine on the development of colon cancer in vivo using 2 murine models: azoxymethane (AOM) treatment as a model of carcinogen-induced colon cancer and a genetically induced model using Apc (Min/+) mice. AOM and Apc (Min/+) mice divided into dietary groups varying in lipid content, with or without carnitine supplementation (0.08%). AOM-exposed mice on a high butterfat diet had significantly increased aberrant crypts (ACF) (9.3 ± 0.88 vs. 6.3 ± 0.65), and macroscopic tumors (3.8 ± 0.95 vs. 2.0 ± 0.25) compared to mice on a control diet. In AOM mice fed the high butterfat diet, carnitine supplementation inhibited ACF (4.9 ± 0.7 vs. 9.3 ± 0.88, P < 0.001), crypt multiciplicity (1.6 ± 0.08 vs. 1.92 ± 0.1, P < 0.01) and tumors (1.5 ± 0.38 vs. 3.8 ± 0.95, P < 0.001). Carnitine supplementation resulted in significantly increased tissue carnitine and acylcarnitine levels. Carnitine inhibited the development of precancerous lesions and macroscopic colonic tumors in AOM-treated mice. However, carnitine did not exert protective effects on intestinal tumors in Apc (Min/+) mice.
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".