Proapoptotic Effect of Hypericum perforatum (St. John's Wort) Extract in Human Colorectal Adenocarcinoma Cell Line HT29
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Objective: Hypericum perforatum (HP) is known to have therapeutic effects in many types of cancer.Although the active substances hypericin and hyperforin in the composition of HP have been shown to exert apoptotic effects in cancer cell lines, research into the anticancer effects of the total extract of HP is meagre.The aim of this study was to investigate the proapoptotic effect of HP on human colorectal adenocarcinoma cell line HT29.Materials and Methods: HT29 cells (5×10 4 cells cmG 2 ) were exposed to 99.2% medium and pharmacologically effective concentration of HP extract (0.8%) for 48 h.Cells were then washed in phosphate buffered saline PBS and lysed in RIPA buffer for 15 min on ice followed by centrifugation at 15000 rpm for 20 min and supernatants were taken and pellets were discarded.ELISA test was used to examine the expression and activity of cleaved caspase-3, Bax, Bcl-2, Wee1, GADD153, GRP78 and AIF proteins in HT29 cells.Results: ELISA test results indicated that the activities of proapoptotic proteins Bax, cleaved-caspase 3, Wee1, GRP78, GADD153 and AIF in human HT29 cell line were significantly increased in 48 h treatment with HP extract at 0.8% concentration.On the other hand, the activity of Bcl-2 was observed to decrease significantly.Conclusion: The results implicated that the HP extract in its original form effectively induces proapoptotic alterations in HT29 cells and a possible mutual signaling between the proapoptotic Wee1, GRP78, GADD153, AIF, Bax and cleaved caspase-3 proteins can contribute to this effect.
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".