ROS-Mediated Cancer Cell Killing through Dietary Phytochemicals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reactive oxygen species (ROS) promote carcinogenesis by inducing genetic mutations, activating oncogenes, and raising oxidative stress, which all influence cell proliferation, survival, and apoptosis. Cancer cells display redox imbalance due to increased ROS level compared to normal cells. This unique feature in cancer cells may, therefore, be exploited for targeted therapy. Over the past few decades, natural compounds have attracted attention as potential cancer therapies because of their ability to maintain cellular redox homeostasis with minimal toxicity. Preclinical studies show that bioactive dietary polyphenols exert antitumor effects by inducing ROS-mediated cytotoxicity in cancer cells. These bioactive compounds also regulate cell proliferation, survival, and apoptotic and antiapoptotic signalling pathways. In this review, we discuss (i) how ROS is generated and (ii) regulated and (iii) the cell signalling pathways affected by ROS. We also discuss (iv) the various dietary phytochemicals that have been implicated to have cancer therapeutic effects through their ROS-related functions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".