Iron Overload and Breast Cancer: Iron Chelation as a Potential Therapeutic Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Breast cancer has historically been one of the leading causes of death for women worldwide. As of 2020, breast cancer was reported to have overtaken lung cancer as the most common type of cancer globally, representing an estimated 11.3% of all cancer diagnoses. A multidisciplinary approach is taken for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer that includes conventional and targeted treatments. However, current therapeutic approaches to treating breast cancer have limitations, necessitating the search for new treatment options. Cancer cells require adequate iron for their continuous and rapid proliferation. Excess iron saturates the iron-binding capacity of transferrin, resulting in non-transferrin-bound iron (NTBI) that can catalyze free-radical reactions and may lead to oxidant-mediated breast carcinogenesis. Moreover, excess iron and the disruption of iron metabolism by local estrogen in the breast leads to the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Therefore, iron concentration reduction using an iron chelator can be a novel therapeutic strategy for countering breast cancer development and progression. This review focuses on the use of iron chelators to deplete iron levels in tumor cells, specifically in the breast, thereby preventing the generation of free radicals. The inhibition of DNA synthesis and promotion of cancer cell apoptosis are the targets of breast cancer treatment, which can be achieved by restricting the iron environment in the body. We hypothesize that the usage of iron chelators has the therapeutic potential to control intracellular iron levels and inhibit the breast tumor growth. In clinical settings, iron chelators can be used to reduce cancer cell growth and thus reduce the morbidity and mortality in breast cancer patients.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".