Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 208

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Lycopene and β-carotene protect against oxidative damage in HT29 cells at low concentrations but rapidly lose this capacity at higher doses

Lowe, Gordon M., Booth, Laurence A., Young, Andrew J., Bilton, Rodney F.·1999·Free Radical Research

Abstract

Epidemiological studies have clearly demonstrated a link between dietary carotenoids and the reduced incidence of certain diseases, including some cancers. However recent intervention studies (e.g. ATBC, CARET and others) have shown that beta-carotene supplementation has little or no beneficial effect and may, in fact, increase the incidence of lung cancers in smokers. This presents a serious dilemma for the scientific community - are carotenoids at high concentrations actually harmful in certain circumstances? Currently, a significant number of intervention studies are on-going throughout the world involving carotenoids (of both natural and synthetic origin). Our approach has been to study the ability of supplementary carotenoids in protecting cells against oxidatively-induced DNA damage (as measured by the comet assay), and membrane integrity (as measured by ethidium bromide uptake). Both lycopene and beta-carotene only afforded protection against DNA damage (induced by xanthine/xanthine oxidase) at relatively low concentrations (1-3 microM). These levels are comparable with those seen in the plasma of individuals who consume a carotenoid-rich diet. However, at higher concentrations (4-10 microM), the ability to protect the cell against such oxidative damage was rapidly lost and, indeed, the presence of carotenoids may actually serve to increase the extent of DNA damage. Similar data were obtained when protection against membrane damage was studied. This would suggest that supplementation with individual carotenoids to significantly elevate blood and tissue levels is of little benefit and, may, in fact, be deleterious. This in vitro data presented maybe significant in the light of recent intervention trials.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10715769900300151

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 208

Metadata

Authors
Lowe, G. M., Booth, L. A., Young, A. J., & Bilton, R. F.
Venue
Free Radical Research
Published
1999-01
Volume
30
Issue
2
Pages
141-151
ISSN
  • 1029-2470 (ISSN-L)
  • 1071-5762
OpenAlex
W1997618919
Cited by
208
References
4
FWCI
8.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Lycopene and β-carotene protect against oxidative damage in HT29 cells at low concentrations but rapidly lose this capacity at higher doses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10715769900300151
The paper
Lowe, G. M., Booth, L. A., Young, A. J., & Bilton, R. F. (1999). Lycopene and β-carotene protect against oxidative damage in HT29 cells at low concentrations but rapidly lose this capacity at higher doses. Free Radical Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/10715769900300151

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.