Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 178

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Beta Carotene: From Biochemistry to Clinical Trials

Open access
Pryor, William A., Stahl, Wilhelm, Rock, Cheryl L.·2009·Nutrition Reviews

Abstract

Three large-scale clinical trials tested the effects of supplemental beta-carotene on the risk for chronic diseases such as cancer. The populations involved were Finnish male heavy smokers (the Alpha Tocopherol Beta Carotene [ATBC] trial), male asbestos workers and male and female heavy smokers (Beta-Carotene and Retinol Efficacy Trial [CARET]), and U.S. male physicians, 11% of whom were current smokers (Physician's Health Study). All three trials concluded that beta-carotene provided no protection against lung cancer; however, quite unexpectedly, two of the trials found a higher risk for lung cancer for those subjects given beta-carotene compared with those that were not. Several authors concluded from these beta-carotene trials that the protective effects of antioxidants against chronic disease are not as great as had been hoped. As reviewed here, however, beta-carotene may or may not be an antioxidant; it certainly differs in many respects from the prototypical antioxidant, vitamin E. In any case, the majority of beta-carotene's effects in vivo are probably not derived from any antioxidant properties that it may possess, but rather from its effect on a number of biochemical systems. Whether taking supplemental antioxidants can reduce the risk for chronic diseases remains to be established, although the case for vitamin E and heart disease appears strong. However, the association between eating a diet sufficient in fruits and vegetables and reduced risk for a number of diseases is consistent. There is no evidence at present that consuming small amounts of supplemental beta-carotene, i.e., amounts in foods or in a multivitamin tablet, is unwise for any population. The role of supplementation, however, particularly at high levels, with compounds that may be anti-oxidants but that are less well understood than vitamin E (e.g., carotenoids, plant polyphenols, and other phytochemicals), is less clear. The surprising results of the ATBC and CARET trials are a red flag, signaling the need for further research; a number of areas for future work are suggested here. Future research should lead to a clearer understanding of the effects of beta-carotene and other phytochemicals, as well as to more refined strategies for intervention, with important clinical and public health implications.

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 · 10.1111/j.1753-4887.2000.tb07810.x

Cites

8 of 8 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 8 references

Cited by

See all 178

Metadata

Authors
Pryor, W. A., Stahl, W., & Rock, C. L.
Venue
Nutrition Reviews
Published
2009-04-27
Volume
58
Issue
2
Pages
39-53
ISSN
  • 0029-6643 (ISSN-L)
  • 1753-4887
OpenAlex
W1974185137
Cited by
178
References
8
FWCI
6.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Beta Carotene: From Biochemistry to Clinical Trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1753-4887.2000.tb07810.x
The paper
Pryor, W. A., Stahl, W., & Rock, C. L. (2009). Beta Carotene: From Biochemistry to Clinical Trials. Nutrition Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-4887.2000.tb07810.x

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.