ReviewAntioxidants (Basel, Switzerland)2026
The Redox Paradox of Natural Supplements in Cancer: A Narrative Review to Guide Clinical Practice.
Review in Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland), 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Supplements are widely perceived as safe and beneficial; yet in oncology, this assumption is questionable. Clinical trials over the past few decades have often produced disappointing results, raising a critical question: are these agents used correctly, or could they inadvertently cause harm? This review examines supplements frequently used in cancer care-such as oral vitamin C, berberine, N-acetylcysteine, vitamin D, vitamin E, melatonin, polyphenols, alpha-lipoic acid, selenium, and coenzyme Q10-which can act as tumor suppressors or promoters depending on dose, route, and disease stage. We examine their dual antioxidant and pro-oxidant properties, revealing that therapeutic outcomes are shaped not only by the molecule itself, but also by bioavailability, dosing thresholds, and the tumor redox environment. Building on these insights, we propose that four factors may be considered to guide clinical use: ensure that anticancer effects are not overshadowed by antioxidant activity, achieve sufficient bioavailability, confirm pro-oxidant concentrations where possible, and prioritize supplements that target the respiration-supported non-OxPhos pathways. By framing supplements as context-dependent redox modulators rather than universally beneficial agents, this review provides a mechanistically grounded framework for informing future research and safer, more effective integrative oncology strategies.
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.