Talk:6-Diazo-5-oxo-L-norleucine

Chemicals Stub‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about 6-Diazo-5-oxo-L-norleucine.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

This article

Hey, I wrote my master thesis about the impact of glutamine concentrations on the anti tumor activity of DON in various cancer cell lines. Since publication will take some time until more data is available, i want to share my basic knowlege about this substance already today. --Galahadin (talk) 14:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this reads too much like a scientific journal paper, and not enough like an encyclopaedia article.

1. Why is acid singular in this sentence:

It is one of the most famous non-proteinogenic amino acid and was characterized in 1956 by Henry W Dion et al., who suggested a possible use in cancer therapy.

and not plural:

one of the most famous non-proteinogenic amino acids?

2. DON was tested as chemotherapeutic agent in different clinical studies, but was never approved.

Why no indefinite article:

DON was tested as a chemotherapeutic agent?

3. And why wasn't it approved?

4. Next, why "improve" and not "improving" in:

In 2019, DON was shown to kill tumor cells while reversing disease symptoms and improve overall survival in late-stage experimental glioblastoma in mice...

5. This construction:

Solutions of at least 50 μM DON in 0.9% NaCl

seems thoroughly scientificese, and unnecessary here.

6.This:

apoptosis, the programmed cell death

looks as though it ought to be

apoptosis, programmed cell death

7. Should this be one sentence:

Different pathways were investigated. So it could be shown that the inner mitochondrial membrane was damaged, and single strand DNA breaks were observed.?

The second sentence doesn't bear syntactical analysis on its own.

8. It seems a very well-constructed scientific article, and well-targeted for this context, but needs tidying up, which I'll attempt on the basis of the above, unless you, User:Galahadin, or anyone else disagrees. Nick Barnett (talk) 14:49, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]