Hydrogen-rich water exerts anti-tumor effects comparable to 5-fluorouracil in a colorectal cancer xenograft model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: dissolved in water [hydrogen-rich water (HRW)], with or without 5-FU, may present itself as a novel therapeutic for CRC. AIM: To investigate the effects of HRW, with or without 5-FU, as a novel therapeutic for CRC. METHODS: (administered in same way as for group three) combined with 5-FU administered same way as group two. RESULTS: Administration of HRW + 5-FU significantly improved tumor weight, tumor size, collagen content and fibrosis as compared to the CRC control group. Specifically, HRW attenuated oxidative stress (OS) and potentiated antioxidant activity (AA), whereas 5-FU treatment exacerbated OS and blunted AA. The combination of HRW + 5-FU significantly reduced tumor weight and size, as well as reduced collagen deposition and the degree of fibrosis, while further increasing OS and decreasing AA compared to administration of 5-FU alone. CONCLUSION: Administration of HRW, with or without 5-FU, may serve as a therapeutic for treating CRC.
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".