Effect of oral iron supplementation on oxidative stress and colonic inflammation in rats with induced colitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Iron supplementation may increase disease activity in ulcerative colitis, possibly through the production of reactive oxygen species from the Fenton reaction. AIM: To assess the effects of two doses of oral iron on intestinal inflammation and oxidative stress in experimental colitis. METHODS: Colitis was induced in rats by giving 5% dextran sulphate sodium in drinking water for 7 days. First, using a 2 x 2 factorial design, rats with or without dextran sulphate sodium received the regular diet or a diet containing iron 3%/kg diet. Second, rats with dextran sulphate sodium-induced colitis were supplemented with iron 0.3%/kg diet and compared with rats on dextran sulphate sodium and regular diet. The body weight change, histological scores, colon length, rectal bleeding, plasma and colonic lipid peroxides, colonic glutathione peroxidase and plasma vitamin E and C were measured. Faecal analysis for haem and total, free and ethylenediaminetetra-acetic acid-chelatable iron was also performed. RESULTS: Iron 3% and iron 0.3% increased the activity of dextran sulphate sodium-induced colitis, as demonstrated by higher histological scores, heavier rectal bleeding and further shortening of the colon. This was associated with increased lipid peroxidation and decreased antioxidant vitamins. Faecal iron available to the Fenton reaction was increased in a dose-dependent manner. CONCLUSIONS: Iron supplementation taken orally enhanced the activity of dextran sulphate sodium-induced colitis and is associated with an increase in oxidative stress.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".