ReviewAntioxidants (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Antioxidant Food Supplementation in Cancer: Lessons from Clinical Trials and Insights from Preclinical Studies.
Review in Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nutritional Prevention of Oxidative Stress-Induced Cardiotoxicity in Pediatric Cardio-Oncology: Molecular Mechanisms and Translational Perspectives-A Narrative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- The Reductive Stress Nexus: Integrated Pathways of Metabolic Dysregulation, Senescence and Blood-Brain Barrier Failure in Neurodegenerative Disease and Brain Aging.Cell biochemistry and biophysics · 2026Review
- ROS and Antioxidants: Prospective Therapeutic Options in Cancer.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2026Article
- The Redox Paradox of Natural Supplements in Cancer: A Narrative Review to Guide Clinical Practice.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Targeting Cancer Stem Cells with Phytochemicals: Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Potential.Biomedicines · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Food antioxidant supplementation has been widely proposed for cancer prevention and adjuvant therapy due to the pleiotropic role of antioxidants. Herein, particular attention is given to recent clinical trials based on the use of dietary supplements in cancer patients, both as monotherapy and in combination with standard treatments, exploring both their potential benefits and risks. This review focuses on the efficacy of the most important food antioxidants, highlighting how their action may change depending on different factors such as cancer type, dose, timing of administration and antioxidant status of the patient. The results of clinical trials are often contradictory, and the clinical benefit of dietary antioxidants appears more consistent in patients with a baseline antioxidant deficiency. Furthermore, by analyzing the mechanisms underlying the contradictory clinical evidence and critically addressing the issues related to the methodologies used in preclinical models, this review could be helpful in guiding the personalized use of antioxidant supplementation in cancer patients.
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.