ArticleCell proliferation2002
G2-phase radiation response in lymphoblastoid cell lines from Nijmegen breakage syndrome.
Article in Cell proliferation, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The relationship between G2-phase checkpoint activation, cytoplasmic cyclin-B1 accumulation and nuclear phosphorylation of p34CDC2 was studied in Nijmegen breakage syndrome cells treated with DNA damaging agents. Experiments were performed on lymphoblastoid cell lines from four Nijmegen breakage syndrome patients with different mutations, as well as on cells from an ataxia telangiectasia patient. Lymphoblastoid cell lines were irradiated with 0.50-2 Gy X-rays and the percentage of G2-phase accumulated cells was evaluated by means of flow cytometry in samples that were harvested 24 h later. The G2-checkpoint activation was analysed by scoring the mitotic index at 2 and 4 h after treatment with 0.5 and 1 Gy X-rays and treatment with the DNA double-strand break inducer calicheamicin-gamma1. Cytoplasmic accumulation of cyclin-B1 was evaluated by means of fluorescence immunostaining or Western blotting, in cells harvested shortly after irradiation with 1 and 2 Gy. The extent of tyrosine 15-phosphorylated p34CDC2 was assessed in the nuclear fractions. Nijmegen breakage syndrome cells showed suboptimal G2-phase checkpoint activation respect to normal cells and were greatly different from ataxia telangiectasia cells. Increased cytoplasmic cyclin-B1 accumulation was detected by both immunofluorescence and immunoblot in normal as well as in Nijmegen breakage syndrome cells. Furthermore, nuclear p34CDC2. phosphorylation was detected at a higher level in Nijmegen breakage syndrome than in ataxia telangiectasia cells. In conclusion, our data do not suggest that failure to activate checkpoints plays a major role in the radiosensitivity of Nijmegen breakage syndrome cells.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.