4.7 Article

Effects of dietary patterns combined with dietary phytochemicals on breast cancer metastasis

期刊

LIFE SCIENCES
卷 264, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.lfs.2020.118720

关键词

Dietary phytochemicals; Dietary patterns; Circulating tumor cells; Combined therapy; Cancer metastasis

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31871874]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that the combination treatment of dietary phytochemicals and different diet types has inhibitory effects on breast cancer metastasis, with enhanced effects when combined. The in vivo CTC capture method allows dynamic monitoring of cancer metastasis over time, providing a useful approach for real-time evaluation of treatment effects.
Aims: Dietary phytochemicals and diet types (e.g., the Mediterranean diet) have been shown to have anti-cancer properties. However, the effects of combined treatment with dietary phytochemicals and different diet types on primary and metastatic tumor growth have yet to be investigated. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of phytochemicals combined with diet types on breast cancer metastasis. Main methods: The inhibitory effects on breast cancer metastasis of three phytochemicals (allicin, hesperidin, astragalus polysaccharides) and two diet types (Mediterranean diet, restricted diet), separately or in combination, were evaluated based on: (i) detection of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) using an in vivo capture method; and (ii) primary tumor growth. Key findings: All dietary factors significantly inhibited the growth of primary tumors and metastases, with combinations showing enhancing the effects. Significance: Dietary phytochemicals and diet types should be further evaluated as adjunct therapies and lifestyle modifications in cancer patients. Furthermore, the in vivo CTC capture method allows dynamic monitoring of cancer metastasis over time, providing a useful approach to evaluating treatment effects in real-time.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据