ArticleInternational journal of oncology2012
Radiofrequency currents exert cytotoxic effects in NB69 human neuroblastoma cells but not in peripheral blood mononuclear cells.
Article in International journal of oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Response of human cancer cells to simultaneous treatment with sorafenib and radiofrequency current.Oncology letters · 2021Article
- Response of neuroblastoma cells to RF currents as a function of the signal frequency.BMC cancer · 2019Article
- Antiadipogenic effects of subthermal electric stimulation at 448 kHz on differentiating human mesenchymal stem cells.Molecular medicine reports · 2016Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently, a number of electric and electrothermal therapies have been applied to the treatment of specific cancer types. However, the cellular and molecular mechanisms involved in the response to such therapies have not been well characterized yet. Capacitive-resistive electric transfer (CRET) therapy uses electric currents at frequencies within the 0.45-0.6 MHz range to induce hyperthermia in target tissues. Preliminary trials in cancer patients have shown consistent signs that CRET could slow down growth of tumor tissues in brain gliomas, without inducing detectable damage in the surrounding healthy tissue. Previous studies by our group have shown that subthermal treatment with 0.57-MHz electric currents can induce a cytostatic, not cytotoxic response in HepG2 human hepatocarcinoma cells; such effect being mediated by cell cycle alterations. In contrast, the study of the response of NB69 human neuroblastoma cells to the same electric treatment revealed consistent indications of cytotoxic effects. The present study extends the knowledge on the response of NB69 cells to the subthermal stimulus, comparing it to that of primary cultures of human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) exposed to the same treatment. The results showed no sensitivity of PBMC to the 0.57 MHz subthermal currents and confirmed that the treatment exerts a cytotoxic action in NB69 cells. The data also revealed a previously undetected cytostatic response of the neuroblastoma cell line. CRET currents affected NB69 cell proliferation by significantly reducing the fraction of cells in the phase G2/M of the cell cycle at 12 h of exposure. These data provide new information on the mechanisms of response to CRET therapy, and are consistent with a cytotoxic and/or cytostatic action of the electric treatment, which would affect human cells of tumor origin but not normal cells with a low proliferation rate.
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.