Evidence Hub

Quercetin and ovarian cancer: An evaluation based on a systematic review

A. Parvaresh, Roghaye Razavi, N. Rafie, R. Ghiasvand, M. Pourmasoumi, M. Miraghajani

Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 2016

36 citations

Abstract

Some studies have suggested chemopreventive and therapeutic effects of quercetin (Q) on carcinogenesis. The aim of this review was to evaluate the association between Q and ovarian cancer risk among human researches and induced sensitivity to some types of chemotherapeutic drugs and antiproliferative effects of this flavonoid in the animals and cell lines studies. Data for this systematic review were achieved through searches of the MEDLINE (PubMed), Google Scholar, Science Direct, Scopus, Cochrane, SID, and Magiran databases for studies published up to May 2015. Relevant studies were reviewed based on Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Review and Meta analysis guidelines. From the total number of 220 papers obtained at the initial search, 13 publications including 1 prospective, 2 case -control, 1 animal, and 9 in vitro human and animal cancer cell lines studies were eligible. Despite findings in laboratory settings, results from the epidemiological studies commented that the potentially protective effects of Q not be able to significantly decrease ovarian cancer risk at levels commonly consumed (1.01–31.7 mg/day) in a typical diet. However, animal and in vitro studies suggest that Q exerts anticancer effects via inhibiting tumor growth, and angiogenesis, interrupt the cell cycle, and induce apoptosis. It is highlighted the need for more studies to be conducted.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in cell cultures (in vitro), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free