Crocin Enhances Cisplatin-Induced Chemosensitivity in Human Cervical Cancer Cell Line
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Anti-tumor effects of crocin have been investigated in different tumors; however, its precise molecular mechanism is not exactly elucidated. Objectives: In the present investigation, we have studied pro-apoptotic and anti-proliferative properties of crocin and cisplatin combination on cervical cancer cells. Methods: Cell viability and apoptosis assays were monitored by MTT, Hoechst 33258 staining methods, respectively. The expression levels of apoptotic related genes, including Bax, Bcl-2, p53 mRNA, and miR-365 were analyzed by quantitative reverse transcription- polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). Using Western blot, we have also assessed the protein expression of the above apoptotic genes. Results: The results of this study demonstrated that the combination treatment of cells with crocin and cisplatin significantly reduced the proliferation of cancer cells and induced apoptosis. Furthermore, the Bax/Bcl-2 ratio and the mRNA level of p53 markedly increased in treated cells, whereas it decreased miR-365 expression, an upstream regulator of Bcl2 and Bax. Conclusions: Accordingly, crocin could be a potential candidate for more evaluations such as in vivo studies, since it shows a proper in vitro anticancer effect. It is also suggested that a combination of crocin and cisplatin could be applied as an effective and promising chemotherapy strategy.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it