Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16162670›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2005

Biological effects in unirradiated human tissue induced by radiation damage up to 1 mm away.

Oleg V Belyakov, Stephen A Mitchell, Deep Parikh, Gerhard Randers-Pehrson, Stephen A Marino, Sally A Amundson, Charles R Geard, David J Brenner

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 98 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
98citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

98 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Low-Dose Non-Targeted Effects and Mitochondrial Control.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Effect of mechanical forces on cellular response to radiation.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2022
    Review
  15. The emerging role of exosomes in radiotherapy.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2022
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

38 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Oleg V BelyakovCenter for Radiological Research, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA. djb3@columbia.edu
Stephen A Mitchell
Deep Parikh
Gerhard Randers-Pehrson
Stephen A Marino
Sally A Amundson
Charles R Geard
David J Brenner

Funding

THE FUNCTIONAL GENOMICS OF BYSTANDER RESPONSESP01CA049062 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI HEI, TOM K. · 1990 to 2014
$21.9M
TR&D 3P41EB002033 · NIBIB · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI BRENNER, DAVID JONATHAN · 2003 to 2018
$17.0M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA049062NCI NIH HHS P01 CA-49062NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB002033NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB002033-09
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A central tenet in understanding the biological effects of ionizing radiation has been that the initially affected cells were directly damaged by the radiation. By contrast, evidence has emerged concerning "bystander" responses involving damage to nearby cells that were not themselves directly traversed by the radiation. These long-range effects are of interest both mechanistically and for assessing risks from low-dose exposures, where only a small proportion of cells are directly hit. Bystander effects have been observed largely by using single-cell in vitro systems that do not have realistic multicellular morphology; no studies have as yet been reported in three-dimensional, normal human tissue. Given that the bystander phenomenon must involve cell-to-cell interactions, the relevance of such single-cell in vitro studies is questionable, and thus the significance of bystander responses for human health has remained unclear. Here, we describe bystander responses in a three-dimensional, normal human-tissue system. Endpoints were induction of micronucleated and apoptotic cells. A charged-particle microbeam was used, allowing irradiation of cells in defined locations in the tissue yet guaranteeing that no cells located more than a few micrometers away receive any radiation exposure. Unirradiated cells up to 1 mm distant from irradiated cells showed a significant enhancement in effect over background, with an average increase in effect of 1.7-fold for micronuclei and 2.8-fold for apoptosis. The surprisingly long range of bystander signals in human tissue suggests that bystander responses may be important in extrapolating radiation risk estimates from epidemiologically accessible doses down to very low doses where nonhit bystander cells will predominate.

Indexed as

DNA DamageAlpha ParticlesApoptosisHumansKeratinocytesMicronucleus Tests

Identifiers

PMID16162670
PMCPMC1202386

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.