ArticlePloS one2024
Syzygium aromaticum essential oil and its major constituents: Assessment of activity against Candida spp. and toxicity.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Essential Oils for Biofilm Control: Mechanisms, Synergies, and Translational Challenges in the Era of Antimicrobial Resistance.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Syzigium aromaticum essential oil (EO), eugenol, and β-caryophyllene were evaluated regarding antifungal, antibiofilm, and in vitro toxicity. Additionally, in vivo toxicity of EO was observed. Anti-Candida activity was assessed through broth microdilution assay for all compounds. Time-kill assay (0, 1, 10, 30 min, 1, 2, and 4 h) was used to determine the influence of EO and eugenol on Candida Growth kinetics. Thereafter, both compounds were evaluated regarding their capacity to act on a biofilm formation and on mature biofilm, based on CFU/ml/g of dry weight. Cell Titer Blue Viability Assay was used for in vitro cytotoxicity, using oral epithelial cells (TR146) and human monocytes (THP-1). Lastly, Galleria mellonella model defined the EO in vivo acute toxicity. All compounds, except β-cariofilene (MIC > 8000 μg/ml), presented antifungal activity against Candida strains (MIC 500-1000 μg/ml). The growth kinetics of Candida was affected by the EO (5xMIC 30 min onward; 10xMIC 10 min onward) and eugenol (5xMIC 10 min onward; 10xMIC 1 min onward). Fungal viability was also affected by 5xMIC and 10xMIC of both compounds during biofilm formation and upon mature biofilms. LD50 was defined for TR146 and THP1 cells at, respectively, 59.37 and 79.54 μg/ml for the EO and 55.35 and 84.16 μg/ml for eugenol. No sign of toxicity was seen in vivo up to 10mg/ml (20 x MIC) for the EO. S. aromaticum and eugenol presented antifungal and antibiofilm activity, with action on cell growth kinetics. In vivo acute toxicity showed a safe parameter for the EO up to 10 mg/ml.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.