MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2329426514 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2012-5432

Abstract 5432: The effect of folic acid supplementation on chemosensitivity of colon cancer cells to 5-fluorouracil in a xenograft model

2012· article· en· W2329426514 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa Ishiguro, Michael Yang, Kyoung‐Jin Sohn, Ruth Croxford, Young‐In Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFolate and B Vitamins Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColorectal cancerFluorouracilMedicineCancerMetastasisChemotherapyInternal medicinePharmacologyCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: As a mediator of one-carbon transfer reactions, folate is an essential cofactor in nucleotide biosynthesis. Interruption of intracellular folate metabolism and the consequent inhibition of tumor growth has been the basis for chemotherapy using antifolates and 5-fluorouracil (5FU). A growing body of evidence suggests that folic acid (FA; the synthetic form) may promote the progression of established colorectal (pre)neoplastic lesions. Folate blood levels in North America have dramatically increased over the past decade owing to FA fortification and widespread supplement use. Furthermore, over 50% of newly diagnosed colorectal cancer patients use vitamin supplements containing FA in addition to chemotherapeutic agents whose mechanisms of action are based on interruption of folate metabolism. This study therefore investigated whether FA supplementation can affect chemosensitivity of colon cancer cells to 5FU, the cornerstone of colorectal cancer treatment, in vivo. Methods: Male athymic nude mice were placed on the control diet containing 2 mg FA/kg diet and were inoculated with human HCT116 colon cancer cells. When xenografts were established, the animals were randomized to receive a diet containing 2, 8, or 25 mg FA/kg diet for eight weeks. Within each diet group, the animals were further randomized to receive saline vehicle or 5FU (20 mg/kg) + leucovorin (1 mg/kg) for five days. The primary endpoints were the rate of xenograft growth and the final volume. At necropsy, blood was collected and xenografts were harvested and evidence of metastasis was determined. Results: Plasma folate concentrations of animals on the 2 mg FA diet were significantly lower than those of animals fed the 8 and 25 mg FA diets (p<0.05). Xenograft folate concentrations significantly reflected the supplemental levels of FA in a dose-responsive manner (p=0.002). The effect of dietary levels of FA and 5FU alone were not significant, p=0.907 and p=0.193, respectively, but the interaction effect was significant (p<0.007). 5FU was beneficial only to animals fed the 2 mg FA diet (p<0.0001). In contrast, animals fed the 8 mg FA diet fared worse on 5FU (p=0.048) whereas animals fed the 25 mg FA diet demonstrated no effect of 5FU (p=0.31). All animals exhibited macroscopically evident lymph node involvement, but no distant metastases, irrespective of dietary levels of FA. Conclusion: Our data suggests that FA supplementation may adversely affect chemosensitivity to 5FU chemotherapy, although a dose-responsive relationship was not evident. Results of this study pose a legitimate public health concern given the drastically increased intake of FA from supplements, particularly among recently diagnosed colorectal cancer patients and from mandatory fortification. Further studies are warranted to confirm our findings and to elucidate the underlying mechanisms. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 103rd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2012 Mar 31-Apr 4; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2012;72(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 5432. doi:1538-7445.AM2012-5432

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.377 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicFolate and B Vitamins Research→French-language works237,207→