Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of β-Cryptoxanthin Supplementation in Healthy Women: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: β-cryptoxanthin is a dietary carotenoid for which there have been few studies on the safety and pharmacokinetics following daily oral supplementation. Methods: 90 healthy Asian women between 21 and 35 years were randomized into three groups: 3 and 6 mg/day oral β-cryptoxanthin, and placebo. At 2, 4, and 8 weeks of supplementation, plasma carotenoid levels were measured. The effects of β-cryptoxanthin on blood retinoid-dependent gene expression, mood, physical activity and sleep, metabolic parameters, and fecal microbial composition were investigated. Results: β-cryptoxanthin supplementation for 8 weeks (3 and 6 mg/day) was found to be safe and well tolerated. Plasma β-cryptoxanthin concentration was significantly higher in the 6 mg/day group (9.0 ± 4.1 µmol/L) compared to 3 mg/day group (6.0 ± 2.6 µmol/L) (p < 0.03), and placebo (0.4 ± 0.1 µmol/L) (p < 0.001) after 8 weeks. Plasma all-trans retinol, α-cryptoxanthin, α-carotene, β-carotene, lycopene, lutein, and zeaxanthin levels were not significantly changed. No effects were found on blood retinol-dependent gene expression, mood, physical activity and sleep, metabolic parameters, and fecal microbial composition. Conclusions: Oral β-cryptoxanthin supplementation over 8 weeks lead to high plasma concentrations of β-cryptoxanthin, with no impact on other carotenoids, and was well tolerated in healthy women.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".