The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparative chemopreventive mechanisms of green tea, black tea and selected polyphenol extracts measured by in vitro bioassays
Abstract
Black tea extracts (hot aqueous, polyphenols and theaflavins) and green tea extracts (hot aqueous, polyphenols, epicatechin, epicatechin gallate, epigallocatechin and epigallocatechin gallate) were tested in nine standardized cell culture assays for comparative cancer chemopreventive properties. Most black and green tea extracts strongly inhibited neoplastic transformation in mouse mammary organ cultures, rat tracheal epithelial cells and human lung tumor epithelial cells. Nearly all tea fractions strongly inhibited benzo[a]pyrene adduct formation with human DNA. Induction of phase II enzymes, glutathione-S-transferase and quinone reductase, were enhanced by nearly all tea fractions, while glutathione was induced by only a few fractions. Ornithine decarboxylase activity was inhibited by nearly all the green tea fractions, but none of the black tea fractions. 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate-induced free radicals were inhibited by most tea fractions. These results provide strong evidence of both anti-mutagenic, anti-proliferative and anti-neoplastic activities for both black and green tea extracts. Such anticancer mechanisms may well be responsible for the cancer preventive efficacies seen in both experimental and human studies.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Dietary phytochemicals and cancer chemoprevention: a review of the clinical evidence
Kotecha, R., Takami, A., & Espinoza, J. L. (2016) · Oncotarget · doi:10.18632/oncotarget.9593 · Cited by 396
‘Angioprevention’: angiogenesis is a common and key target for cancer chemopreventive agents
Tosetti, F., Ferrari, N., De Flora, S., & Albini, A. (2002) · The FASEB Journal · doi:10.1096/fj.01-0300rev · Cited by 324
Fiander, H. (2000) · Cancer Letters · doi:10.1016/s0304-3835(00)00368-2 · Cited by 97
In-vivo data on the influence of tobacco smoke and UV light on murine skin
Pavlou, P., Rallis, M., Deliconstantinos, G., Papaioannou, G., & Grando, S. (2009) · Toxicology and Industrial Health · doi:10.1177/0748233709103209 · Cited by 37
Metadata
- Authors
- Steele, V. E.
- Venue
- Carcinogenesis
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2000-01-01
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 63-67
- ISSN
- 0143-3334 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2180
- OpenAlex
- W2165229464
- Cited by
- 179
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.52
- 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: Comparative chemopreventive mechanisms of green tea, black tea and selected polyphenol extracts measured by in vitro bioassays. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/carcin/21.1.63
- The paper
- Steele, V. E. (2000). Comparative chemopreventive mechanisms of green tea, black tea and selected polyphenol extracts measured by in vitro bioassays. Carcinogenesis. https://doi.org/10.1093/carcin/21.1.63
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.