ArticlePloS one2026
Swertiamarin fails to induce cytotoxicity in colon cancer cell lines: Evidence against a direct anticancer effect.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide, with rising incidence linked to unhealthy lifestyle habits. Although 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) remains a standard therapy, its efficacy is often limited by resistance and adverse effects. These limitations have driven interest in plant-derived bioactive compounds as complementary or alternative therapies. This study investigated the potential anticancer effects of Swertiamarin (SWT), a seco-iridoid glycoside with reported anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties.
methodsThree human CRC cell lines (HT-29, HCT-116, and Caco-2) and a non-cancerous (Vero E6) cell line were treated with SWT sourced from three independent suppliers to ensure reproducibility. Cell viability was evaluated using Trypan blue exclusion and MTT assays, while scratch assay and microscopic analyses were used to assess migration and morphological changes. The antioxidant capacity of SWT was measured using hydrogen peroxide scavenging assays, and its antimicrobial activity was tested against Escherichia coli (E. coli) and Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus).
resultsSWT exhibited minimal or no effect on cell proliferation across all cell lines, concentrations, and time points, while 5-FU significantly reduced cell viability. Co-treatment with SWT and 5-FU did not enhance cytotoxicity, indicating no synergistic effect. SWT also had no impact on cell migration or morphology. However, it demonstrated strong antioxidant activity comparable to ascorbic acid and displayed antimicrobial effects, transiently inhibiting E. coli and persistently suppressing S. aureus.
conclusionSWT does not exert direct cytotoxic or antimigratory effects in CRC models but possesses potent antioxidant and antimicrobial activities. These findings suggest a possible chemopreventive or protective role for SWT rather than a therapeutic one. This study underscores the importance of rigorous and reproducible evaluation of pure natural products to accurately define their biological and therapeutic potential.
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.