Comparative Study of the Protective Effect of Cola anomala and Coffea arabica Against Induced Toxicity in Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work was aimed at evaluating the effects of C. anomala and C. arabica on Methotrexate (MTX) induced metabolic disorders. For this, the aqueous extract (AE) of C. anomala and C. arabica were prepared and their polyphenols, flavonoids and alkaloids contents determined as well as their antiradical and total antioxidant capacity. An animal experimentation using female rats was carried out for 14 days. Rats were divided into 6 groups; a negative control group receiving water; a positive control group receiving 12mg/Kg Bw of MTX; four tests groups receiving 12mg/Kg Bw of MTX and one of the extracts at a dose of 200mg/Kg Bw or 400mg/Kg Bw. At the end of the experiment, plasmas and hemolysates were prepared as well as liver and kidney homogenates for the evaluation of oxidative status (catalase, total protein and malondialdehyde (MDA)), liver toxicity (alanine amino transferase (ALT)) and renal toxicity (creatinine and urea) and lipid profile (triglycerides, total cholesterol and HDL-cholesterol). Weight gain in extract-treated rats was better with the C. anomala. Concerning oxidative status, MDA levels were generally lower in C. anomala-treated groups compared to C. arabica while catalase level was higher in C. anomala-treated rats. As for lipid profile, it is C. arabica that showed more or less better results. Both extracts led to an amelioration of toxicity markers compared to exclusive treatment with MTX. The results of this study suggest that C. anomala and C. arabica may reduce metabolic disorders associated with the intake of MTX during cancer treatment; C. anomala protecting better C. arabica.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".