Antioxidant and nephroprotection activities of Combretum micranthum: A phytochemical, in-vitro and ex-vivo studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Management of chronic renal failure is exceedingly expensive. Despite of encouraging experimental outcomes, there is a lack of potent nephroprotective drugable molecules in a clinics or market. To develop a nephroprotective phytomedicine, the present study was designed to do a literature survey on reported phytochemical and biological analysis of Combretum micranthum and to carry out chemoprofiling, in-vitro antioxidant and ex-vivo nephroprotective capacity of the title plant. The phytochemical and biological activity survey of C. micranthum has reveals the presence of many bioactive compounds such as flavonoids, terpenoids, steroids and alkaloids with many biological activities. Phytochemical investigation re-confirmed the presence of these compounds. Hydroalcoholic extract of C. micranthum (CM extract) showed a strong antioxidant activity by scavenging AAPH, DPPH, nitric oxide, hydrogen peroxide and chelating metal ions. CM extract exhibited significant ( P < 0.001) dose dependent inhibition of ferric chloride-ascorbic acid induced lipid peroxidation. Diabetic nephropathy is a serious and common complication leading to end stage renal disease. Therefore, in the present study, glucose-induced toxicity was also studied in human embryonic kidney cells (HEK-293) as an in vitro model for diabetic nephropathy. The results showed that exposure of cells to high glucose (100 mM) for 72 h significantly reduced the cell viability resulting in morphological changes such as cell shrinkage, rounded cell shape and cytoplasmic vacuolation. Treatment with CM extract at 10 and 25 μg/mL resulted in significant improvement in cell viability from 10 to 23% compared to the high glucose control. This study demonstrated the potential antioxidant and nephroprotective properties of C. micranthum , justifying its traditional use in the treatment of various diseases.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".