Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12618888›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2003

A proliferation-dependent bystander effect in primary porcine and human urothelial explants in response to targeted irradiation.

O V Belyakov, M Folkard, C Mothersill, K M Prise, B D Michael

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
9.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 108 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Oncogenic bystander radiation effects in Patched heterozygous mouse cerebellum.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2008
    Article
  14. Protective bystander effects simulated with the state-vector model.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society · 2007
    Article
  15. Radiation-induced bystander effects: evidence for an adaptive response to low dose exposures?Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society · 2006
    Article
  16. Low-LET-induced radioprotective mechanisms within a stochastic two-stage cancer model.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society · 2006
    Article
  17. Biological effects in unirradiated human tissue induced by radiation damage up to 1 mm away.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2005
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

O V BelyakovGay Cancer Institute, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, Middlesex, UK.
M Folkard
C Mothersill
K M Prise
B D Michael
Mount Vernon Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to test whether radiation-induced bystander effects are involved in the response of multicellular systems to targeted irradiation. A primary explant technique was used that reconstructed the in vivo microarchitecture of normal urothelium with proliferating and differentiated cells present. Sections of human and porcine ureter were cultured as explants and irradiated on day 7 when the urothelial outgrowth formed a halo around the tissue fragment. The Gray Cancer Institute charge particle microbeam facility allowed the irradiation of individual cells within the explant outgrowth with a predetermined exact number of (3)He(2+) ions (which have very similar biological effectiveness to alpha-particles). A total of 10 individual cell nuclei were irradiated with 10 (3)He(2+) ions either on the periphery, where proliferating cells are located, or at the centre of the explant outgrowth, which consisted of terminally differentiated cells. Samples were fixed 3 days after irradiation, stained and scored. The fraction of apoptotic and micronucleated cells was measured and a significant bystander-induced damage was observed. Approximately 2000-6000 cells could be damaged by the irradiation of a few cells initially, suggesting a cascade mechanism of cell damage induction. However, the fraction of micronucleated and apoptotic cells did not exceed 1-2% of the total number of the cells within the explant outgrowth. It is concluded that the bystander-induced damage depends on the proliferation status of the cells and can be observed in an in vitro explant model.

Indexed as

Bystander EffectAnimalsApoptosisCell DivisionHumansMicronuclei, Chromosome-DefectiveSwineUreter

Identifiers

PMID12618888
PMCPMC2376355
OpenAlexW2087617186

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.