ArticleJournal of radiation research2012
Genomic characterization of a three-dimensional skin model following exposure to ionizing radiation.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-time confocal imaging for evaluation of dose-dependent effects of gamma knife radiosurgery on U87 glioblastoma cell line.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Article
- Bystander signals from low- and high-dose irradiated human primary fibroblasts and keratinocytes modulate the inflammatory response of peripheral blood mononuclear cells.Journal of radiation research · 2023Article
- Short- and long-term effects of radiation exposure at low dose and low dose rate in normal human VH10 fibroblasts.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- High-throughput screening strategies for space-based radiation countermeasure discovery.Life sciences in space research · 2022Review
- Targeting Hydroxybenzoic Acids to Mitochondria as a Strategy to Delay Skin Ageing: An In Vitro Approach.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Radiation-response in primary fibroblasts of long-term survivors of childhood cancer with and without second primary neoplasms: the KiKme study.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2022Article
- -Omics potential of in vitro skin models for radiation exposure.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2022Review
- Review
- Comparison of time and dose dependent gene expression and affected pathways in primary human fibroblasts after exposure to ionizing radiation.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2020Article
- Characterization of a New Reconstructed Full Thickness Skin Model, T-Skin™, and its Application for Investigations of Anti-Aging Compounds.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Article
- Article
- Global Gene Expression Alterations as a Crucial Constituent of Human Cell Response to Low Doses of Ionizing Radiation Exposure.International journal of molecular sciences · 2015Review
- Integrative analysis of gene expression in response to low-dose ionizing radiation in a human skin model.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2015Article
- Gene profiling characteristics of radioadaptive response in AG01522 normal human fibroblasts.PloS one · 2015Article
- Intensity modulated radiotherapy induces pro-inflammatory and pro-survival responses in prostate cancer patients.International journal of oncology · 2014Article
- Comparison of low and high dose ionising radiation using topological analysis of gene coexpression networks.BMC genomics · 2012Article
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
Abstract
This study aimed at characterizing the genomic response to low versus moderate doses of ionizing radiation (LDIR versus MDIR) in a three-dimensional (3D) skin model, which exhibits a closer tissue complexity to human skin than monolayer cell cultures. EpiDermFT skin plugs were exposed to 0, 0.1 and 1 Gy doses of X-rays and harvested at 5 min, 3, 8 and 24 h post-irradiation (post-IR). RNA was interrogated for global gene expression alteration. Our results show that MDIR modulated a larger number of genes over the course of 24 h compared to LDIR. However, immediately and throughout the first 3h post-IR, LDIR modulated a larger number of genes than MDIR, mostly associated with cell-cell signaling and survival promotion. Significant modulation of pathways was detected only at 3 h post-IR in MDIR with induction of genes promoting apoptosis. Collectively, the data show different dynamics in the response to LDIR versus MDIR, especially in cell-cycle distribution. LDIR-exposed tissues showed signs of attempted cell-cycle re-entry as early as 3 h post-IR, but were arrested beyond 8 h at the G1/S checkpoint. At 24 h, cells appeared to accumulate at the G2/M checkpoint. MDIR-exposed tissues did not exhibit a prolonged G1/S arrest but rather a prolonged G2/M arrest, which was sustained at least up to 24 h. By 24 h cells exhibited signs of recovery in both LDIR- and MDIR-exposed tissues. In summary, the most pronounced difference in the initial cellular response to LDIR versus MDIR is the promotion of protection and survival in LDIR versus the promotion of apoptosis in MDIR.
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.