Anticancer and Antimicrobial Activities of Some Antioxidant-Rich Cameroonian Medicinal Plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditional remedies have a long-standing history in Cameroon and continue to provide useful and applicable tools for treating ailments. Here, the anticancer, antimicrobial and antioxidant activities of ten antioxidant-rich Cameroonian medicinal plants and of some of their isolated compounds are evaluated.The plant extracts were prepared by maceration in organic solvents. Fractionation of plant extract was performed by column chromatography and the structures of isolated compounds (emodin, 3-geranyloxyemodin, 2-geranylemodin) were confirmed spectroscopically. The antioxidant activity (AOA) was determined using the 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) bleaching method, the trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity (TEAC), and the hemoglobin ascorbate peroxidase activity inhibition (HAPX) assays. The anticancer activity was evaluated against A431 squamous epidermal carcinoma, WM35 melanoma, A2780 ovary carcinoma and cisplatin-resistant A2780cis cells, using a direct colorimetric assay. The total phenolic content in the extracts was determined spectrophotometrically by the Folin-Ciocalteu method. Rumex abyssinicus showed the best AOA among the three assays employed. The AOA of emodin was significantly higher than that of 3-geranyloxyemodin and 2-geranylemodin for both TEAC and HAPX methods. The lowest IC(50) values (i.e., highest cytotoxicity) were found for the extracts of Vismia laurentii, Psorospermum febrifugum, Pentadesma butyracea and Ficus asperifolia. The Ficus asperifolia and Psorospermum febrifugum extracts are selective against A2780cis ovary cells, a cell line which is resistant to the standard anticancer drug cisplatin. Emodin is more toxic compared to the whole extract, 3-geranyloxyemodin and 2-geranylemodin. Its selectivity against the platinum-resistant A2780cis cell line is highest. All of the extracts display antimicrobial activity, in some cases comparable to that of gentamycin.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".