Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22110685›Full record

ArticlePloS one2011

Comparison and avoidance of toxicity of penetrating cryoprotectants.

Edyta A Szurek, Ali Eroglu

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 102 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Lessons From Drug Discovery for Cryoprotective Agent Design: An AI-Oriented Perspective.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Clinical-Grade Cryopreservation of Human-Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Abamectin Causes Neurotoxicity in Zebrafish Embryos.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Edyta A SzurekInstitute of Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Georgia Health Sciences University, Augusta, Georgia, United States of America.
Ali Eroglu
Augusta University · USAugusta University Health · US

Funding

Sugars as Novel Cryoprotectants for Primate OocytesR01HD049537 · NICHD · AUGUSTA UNIVERSITY · PI EROGLU, ALI · 2006 to 2009
$1.2M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD049537NICHD NIH HHS R01HD049537
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this study was to elucidate the toxicity of widely used penetrating cryoprotective agents (CPAs) to mammalian oocytes. To this end, mouse metaphase II (M II) oocytes were exposed to 1.5 M solutions of dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO), ethylene glycol (EG), or propanediol (PROH) prepared in phosphate buffered saline (PBS) containing 10% fetal bovine serum. To address the time- and temperature-dependence of the CPA toxicity, M II oocytes were exposed to the aforementioned CPAs at room temperature (RT, ∼23°C) and 37°C for 15 or 30 minutes. Subsequently, the toxicity of each CPA was evaluated by examining post-exposure survival, fertilization, embryonic development, chromosomal abnormalities, and parthenogenetic activation of treated oocytes. Untreated oocytes served as controls. Exposure of MII oocytes to 1.5 M DMSO or 1.5 M EG at RT for 15 min did not adversely affect any of the evaluated criteria. In contrast, 1.5 M PROH induced a significant increase in oocyte degeneration (54.2%) and parthenogenetic activation (16%) under same conditions. When the CPA exposure was performed at 37°C, the toxic effect of PROH further increased, resulting in lower survival (15%) and no fertilization while the toxicity of DMSO and EG was still insignificant. Nevertheless, it was possible to completely avoid the toxicity of PROH by decreasing its concentration to 0.75 M and combining it with 0.75 M DMSO to bring the total CPA concentration to a cryoprotective level. Moreover, combining lower concentrations (i.e., 0.75 M) of PROH and DMSO significantly improved the cryosurvival of MII oocytes compared to the equivalent concentration of DMSO alone. Taken together, our results suggest that from the perspective of CPA toxicity, DMSO and EG are safer to use in slow cooling protocols while a lower concentration of PROH can be combined with another CPA to avoid its toxicity and to improve the cryosurvival as well.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell SurvivalChromosome AberrationsCryoprotective AgentsDose-Response Relationship, DrugEmbryonic DevelopmentFertilizationMiceOocytesPloidiesTemperatureTime FactorsToxicity TestsCryoprotective Agents

Identifiers

PMID22110685
PMCPMC3217997
OpenAlexW2085010800

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.