Regulation of Nrf2/ARE Pathway by Dietary Flavonoids: A Friend or Foe for Cancer Management?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (Nrf2)/antioxidant response element (ARE) pathway is an important cell signaling mechanism in maintaining redox homeostasis in humans. The role of dietary flavonoids in activating Nrf2/ARE in relation to cancer chemoprevention or cancer promotion is not well established. Here we summarize the dual effects of flavonoids in cancer chemoprevention and cancer promotion with respect to the regulation of the Nrf2/ARE pathway, while underlying the possible cellular mechanisms. Luteolin, apigenin, quercetin, myricetin, rutin, naringenin, epicatechin, and genistein activate the Nrf2/ARE pathway in both normal and cancer cells. The hormetic effect of flavonoids has been observed due to their antioxidant or prooxidant activity, depending on the concentrations. Reported in vitro and in vivo investigations suggest that the activation of the Nrf2/ARE pathway by either endogenous or exogenous stimuli under normal physiological conditions contributes to redox homeostasis, which may provide a mechanism for cancer chemoprevention. However, some flavonoids, such as luteolin, apigenin, myricetin, quercetin, naringenin, epicatechin, genistein, and daidzein, at low concentrations (1.5 to 20 µM) facilitate cancer cell growth and proliferation in vitro. Paradoxically, some flavonoids, including luteolin, apigenin, and chrysin, inhibit the Nrf2/ARE pathway in vitro. Therefore, even though flavonoids play a major role in cancer chemoprevention, due to their possible inducement of cancer cell growth, the effects of dietary flavonoids on cancer pathophysiology in patients or appropriate experimental animal models should be investigated systematically.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".