MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pharmacologic Evidence of Green Tea in Targeting Tyrosine Kinases

2020· review· en· W3093021343 on OpenAlexaff
Joyce T. S. Li, Kam‐Lun Ellis Hon, Alexander K. C. Leung, Vivian Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Reviews in Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTea Polyphenols and Effects
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReceptor tyrosine kinaseTyrosine kinaseROR1Cancer researchPlatelet-derived growth factor receptorGrowth factor receptorPharmacologyKinaseBiologyMedicineSignal transductionCell biologyReceptorGrowth factorBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Green tea has been extensively studied for its potential health benefits against diseases, such as cancers, cognitive degenerative diseases, and cardiovascular diseases. METHODS: The authors undertook a structured search of peer-reviewed research articles from three databases including PubMed, Embase, and Ovid MEDLINE. Recent and up-to-date studies relevant to the topic were included. RESULTS: Green tea extract exerts its functions by interacting with multiple signalling pathways in human cells. Protein tyrosine kinase is one of the examples. Abnormal activation of tyrosine kinase is observed in some tumour cells. Green tea extract inhibits phosphorylation, reduces expression, or attenuates downstream signalling of epidermal growth factor receptor, insulin-like growth factor receptor, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, and non-receptor tyrosine kinase. Combination of green tea extract with tyrosine kinase inhibitors may provide synergistic effects by overcoming acquired resistance. CONCLUSION: Green tea extract can affect multiple receptor targets. In the current review, we discuss the pharmacological mechanisms of green tea on tyrosine kinases and their implications on common diseases.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.319
GPT teacher head0.567
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Reviews in Clinical and Experimental PharmacologySame topicTea Polyphenols and EffectsFrench-language works237,207