In Vitro Toxicity Evaluation of Carrageenan on Cells and Tissues of the Oral Cavity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carrageenan is a highly potent anti-human papillomavirus (HPV) agent with the potential for formulation as a mouthwash against oral HPV infection. However, its toxic effect on tissues of the oral cavity is currently unknown. This study aims to evaluate the safety of carrageenan on human cells and tissues of the oral cavity. Human salivary gland cells and reconstructed human oral epithelium (RHOE) were used for this in vitro study. The cells were subjected to 0.005-100 µg/mL of carrageenan for 4, 12, and 24 h in quadruplicate. RHOE were exposed to 100 µg/mL of carrageenan for 24 h in triplicate and stained with hematoxylin/eosin for histological analyses. All experiments had saline and 1% sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS) as negative and positive controls, respectively. Carrageenan tissue toxicity was evaluated using a 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay to quantify cell viability. Tissue toxicity was further evaluated histologically by an oral pathologist to assess morphological changes. Our data showed that carrageenan did not significantly decrease cell and tissue viability when compared to the positive control. The histological evaluation of the RHOE also showed no loss of viability of the carrageenan-treated sample compared to untreated tissue. In contrast, 1% SDS-treated RHOE showed extensive tissue destruction. Our experiments suggest that carrageenan is safe for use in the oral cavity.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".