Comparison of Viscum album QuFrF Extract with Vincristine in an in vitro Model of Human B Cell Lymphoma WSU-1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Viscum album L. extract (Iscador) with different preparations is used either alone or in combination with chemo/radiotherapy in the treatment of patients with various tumours.Vincristine (CAS 57-22-7) as a chemotherapeutic agent is used mainly in combination with other chemotherapeutic substances in the therapy of B cell lymphoma. In this study, the effects of Viscum album (VA) QuFrF extract and vincristine were compared on B cell lymphoma cell line WSU-1 in an in vitro model. As parameters were measured: proliferation, viability, apoptosis/necrosis, IL-6 production, DNA synthesis and the cell cycle phases of the lymphoma cells at various time points. RESULTS: The cytostatic (inhibition of proliferation) effects ofVAQuFrF and vincristine at 10 microg/10(5) cells were the same at 48 h and 72 h. This means that the anti-proliferative effect of 2 ng lectin (in 10 microg extract) is equivalent to 10 microg of vincristine. There was a relationship between the cytostatic and cytocidal (killing of viable cells) effects for both substances. This means that both substances first inhibit the proliferation of the tumour cells, and then the cells die by apoptosis or necrosis. VAQuFrF and vincristine reduced the DNA synthesis markedly and arrested the G2/M cell cycle phase. Both substances led to a clearly dose-dependent apoptosis at 12 h and 24 h. Neither VAQuFrF nor vincristine led to IL-6 production of the lymphoma cells. CONCLUSION: The effects of VAQuFrF on the B cell lymphoma cell line WSU-1 were comparable to those of vincristine in all parameters. The effective dose range lay between 50 and 100 microg/10(6) cells for VAQuFrF, for vincristine it was somewhat lower.
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) | 0.001 | 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".