Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Chemoprevention: general perspective.

I Shureiqi1, P Reddy, D E Brenner

  • 1Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor 48109-0934, USA.

Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology
|May 2, 2000
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Universal DNA methylation age across mammalian tissues.

Nature aging·2023
Same author

Prolonged Orbital Relaxation by Locally Modified Phonon Density of States for the SiV^{-} Center in Nanodiamonds.

Physical review letters·2022
Same author

Development and evaluation of a molecular based protocol for detection and quantification of Cryptosporidium spp. in wastewater.

Experimental parasitology·2022
Same author

Low Prevalence of Screen-Detected Colorectal Cancer in an Average-Risk Population: The New Normal.

Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association·2021
Same author

A review on application of next-generation sequencing methods for profiling of protozoan parasites in water: Current methodologies, challenges, and perspectives.

Journal of microbiological methods·2021
Same author

Using observations and source specific model tracers to characterize pollutant transport during FRAPPÉ and DISCOVER-AQ.

Journal of geophysical research. Atmospheres : JGR·2020
Same journal

Opportunities and Challenges of Dihydrodiol dehydrogenase Expression in Hepatocellular carcinoma.

Critical reviews in oncology/hematology·2026
Same journal

Ferroptosis in glioblastoma: Molecular determinants, immune crosstalk, and therapeutic opportunities.

Critical reviews in oncology/hematology·2026
Same journal

Beyond oncogenesis: The emerging role of EZH2 in tumor microenvironment.

Critical reviews in oncology/hematology·2026
Same journal

Cross-scale bioanalytical integration for decoding tumour regulatory plasticity in oncology.

Critical reviews in oncology/hematology·2026
Same journal

Organoids in biliary tract cancers: Advances in modeling strategies and translational applications.

Critical reviews in oncology/hematology·2026
Same journal

Wearable-Derived Digital Biomarkers for Predicting Systemic Therapy Toxicity and Survival in Oncology.

Critical reviews in oncology/hematology·2026
See all related articles

Chemoprevention uses compounds to prevent cancer by understanding cellular carcinogenesis. Evaluating these agents involves in vitro, in vivo, and clinical trials to assess their efficacy in reducing cancer risk.

Area of Science:

  • Oncology
  • Pharmacology
  • Molecular Biology

Background:

  • Chemoprevention utilizes natural or synthetic compounds to inhibit or reverse cancer development.
  • Cellular carcinogenesis provides the biological foundation for identifying and evaluating chemopreventive agents.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To outline the multistep evaluation process for chemopreventive agents.
  • To discuss the methodologies and challenges in assessing chemopreventive efficacy.
  • To identify future directions and needs in cancer chemoprevention research.

Main Methods:

  • In vitro assessments include antioxidant activity, Phase II enzyme induction, and effects on cellular proliferation and apoptosis.
  • In vivo efficacy is primarily evaluated using organ-specific rodent models of carcinogenesis.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Clinical assessment involves Phase 1 (agent identification), Phase 2 (surrogate endpoint modulation), and Phase 3 (cancer risk reduction) trials.

    • Main Results:

    • The study details the distinct in vitro, in vivo, and clinical evaluation stages for chemopreventive agents.
    • Current in vivo models and the role of genetically modified models require further clarification.
    • Clinical trials progress from surrogate markers to large-scale cancer risk reduction studies.

    Conclusions:

    • Reliable predictive in vivo models of carcinogenesis are crucial for advancing chemoprevention research.
    • Exploring the preventive pharmacology of existing therapeutics and incorporating genetic risk cohorts are key future needs.
    • Multidisciplinary approaches are essential for defining and improving cancer chemopreventive efficacy.