Antiproliferative and Apoptotic Effects of Graphene Oxide @AlFu MOF Based Saponin Natural Product on OSCC Line
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing rate of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and the undesirable side effects of anticancer agents have enhanced the demand for the development of efficient, detectable, and targeted anticancer systems. Saponins are a diverse family of natural glycosides that have recently been evaluated as an effective compound for the targeted therapy of squamous cell carcinoma. Due to their porous nature and stable structure, metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) are a well-known substance form for various biological applications, such as drug delivery. In this study, we fabricated a novel hybrid, highly porous and low-toxic saponin-loaded nanostructure by modifying graphene oxide (GO)/reduced GO (rGO) with aluminum fumarate (AlFu) as MOF core-shell nanocomposite. The characterization of the nanostructures was investigated by FTIR, TEM, EDX, FESEM, and BET. MTT assay was used to investigate the anticancer activity of these compounds on OSCC and PDL normal dental cells. The effect of the nanocomposites on OSCC was then investigated by studying apoptosis and necrosis using flow cytometry. The GO/rGO was decorated with a saponin-AlFu mixture to further investigate cytotoxicity. The results of the MTT assay showed that PDL cells treated with AlFu-GO-saponin at a concentration of 250 μg/mL had a viability of 74.46 ± 16.02%, while OSCC cells treated with this sample at a similar concentration had a viability of only 38.35 ± 19.9%. The anticancer effect of this nanostructure on OSCC was clearly demonstrated. Moreover, the number of apoptotic cells in the AlFu-GO-saponin and AlFu-rGO-saponin groups was 10.98 ± 2.36%-26.90 ± 3.24% and 15.9 ± 4.08%-29.88 ± 0.41%, respectively, compared with 2.52 ± 0.78%-1.31 ± 0.62% in the untreated group. This significant increase in apoptotic effect observed with AlFu-rGO-saponin was also reflected in the significant anticancer effect of saponin-loaded nanostructures. Therefore, this study suggests that an effective saponin delivery system protocol for the precise design and fabrication of anticancer nanostructures for OSCC therapy should be performed prior to in vivo evaluations.
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) | 0.000 | 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".