Vitamin C: A concentration-function approach yields pharmacology and therapeutic discoveries
Open accessAbstract
A concentration-function approach to vitamin C (ascorbate) has yielded new physiology and pharmacology discoveries. To determine the range of vitamin C concentrations possible in humans, pharmacokinetics studies were conducted. They showed that when vitamin C is ingested by mouth, plasma and tissue concentrations are tightly controlled by at least 3 mechanisms in healthy humans: absorption, tissue accumulation, and renal reabsorption. A 4th mechanism, rate of utilization, may be important in disease. With ingested amounts found in foods, vitamin C plasma concentrations do not exceed 100 μmol/L. Even with supplementation approaching maximally tolerated doses, ascorbate plasma concentrations are always <250 μmol/L and frequently <150 μmol/L. By contrast, when ascorbate is i.v. injected, tight control is bypassed until excess ascorbate is eliminated by glomerular filtration and renal excretion. With i.v. infusion, pharmacologic ascorbate concentrations of 25-30 mmol/L are safely achieved. Pharmacologic ascorbate can act as a pro-drug for hydrogen peroxide (H(2)O(2)) formation, which can lead to extracellular fluid at concentrations as high as 200 μmol/L. Pharmacologic ascorbate can elicit cytotoxicity toward cancer cells and slow the growth of tumors in experimental murine models. The effects of pharmacologic ascorbate should be further studied in diseases, such as cancer and infections, which may respond to generation of reactive oxygen species via H(2)O(2).
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
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Plasma vitamin C levels increase to a plateau concentration up to doses of about 200-400 mg daily; higher doses increase plasma levels only minimally.
“The plasma levels increase to this plateau concentration up to doses of about 200–400 mg daily. Higher doses increase plasma levels only minimally [55,65,66].”
From Vitamin C-Sources, Physiological Role, Kinetics, Deficiency, Use, Toxicity, and Determination (2021) · cites this paper as [65]
The contradictory results of early vitamin C cancer trials can be explained at least partly by differences in administration route.
“these contradictory results can be explained, at least in part, by differences in the administration route of vitamin C”
From Targeting cancer vulnerabilities with high-dose vitamin C (2019) · cites this paper as [2]
The millimolar concentration of vitamin C that is cytotoxic to cancer cells can be achieved only by intravenous injection, not oral administration.
“the millimolar concentration of vitamin C cytotoxic to cancer cells is achievable only by intravenous injection, not by oral administration2”
From Targeting cancer vulnerabilities with high-dose vitamin C (2019) · cites this paper as [2]
The latter randomized trials utilized oral vitamin C, which induces transient micromolar increases in plasma levels significantly below the concentration used in this study (0.345 mm).
“However, these latter studies utilized oral vitamin C, which induces transient micromolar increases in plasma levels55 significantly below the concentration used in our study (0.345 mm).”
From Vitamin C-induced epigenomic remodelling in IDH1 mutant acute myeloid leukaemia (2018) · cites this paper as [55]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 88 · Cited by 357
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Food and Nutrition Board (U.S.R.C.) Recommended dietary allow- ances. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1989.
- Food and Nutrition Board, Panel on Dietary Antioxidants and Related Compounds. Vitamin C. Dietary Reference intakes for vitamin C, vita- min E, selenium, and carotenoids. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2000. p. 95-185, 1-20, 434-435, 442-443.
- Authors
- Levine, M., Padayatty, S. J., & Espey, M. G.
- Affiliations
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- Corresponding author
- Levine, Mark
- Venue
- Advances in Nutrition
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-03
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 78-88
- ISSN
- 2156-5376 (ISSN-L)
- 2161-8313
- PMC
- PMC3065766
- OpenAlex
- W1982462963
- Cited by
- 357
- References
- 88
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 2.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Advances in Nutrition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Vitamin C and Antioxidants Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Biochemistry › Antioxidant Activity and Oxidative Stress
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Cancer and biochemical research
- Keywords
- vitamin C, pharmacokinetics, oral supplementation, renal excretion, tissue accumulation, hydrogen peroxide, prodrugs, reactive oxygen species, tumor growth inhibition
- MeSH terms
- Absorption, Animals, Ascorbic Acid, Female, Humans, Hydrogen Peroxide, Male, Neoplasms, Vitamins, Mice, Knockout, Mice
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