ArticleFrontiers in genetics2013
Comparison between two FISH techniques in the in vitro study of cytogenetic markers for low-dose X-ray exposure in human primary fibroblasts.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- High Resolution and Automatable Cytogenetic Biodosimetry Using In Situ Telomere and Centromere Hybridization for the Accurate Detection of DNA Damage: An Overview.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Article
- Correspondence: Response to "Evaluating the Cumulative Impact of Ionizing Radiation Exposure With Diagnostic Genetics".Annals of laboratory medicine · 2019Article
- PML nuclear body disruption impairs DNA double-strand break sensing and repair in APL.Cell death & disease · 2016Article
- Comparison of Individual Radiosensitivity to γ-Rays and Carbon Ions.Frontiers in oncology · 2016Article
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
This work is about the setup of an in vitro system to report low-dose of X-rays as measured as cytogenetic damage. Q- and multicolor FISH (m-FISH), for telomere length and chromosome instability analysis, respectively, were compared to evaluate their sensitivity in the low-dose range in human primary fibroblasts. No telomere length modulation was observed up to 1 Gy in cycling fibroblasts, though reported for high doses, by that frustrating the purpose of using it as a low-exposure marker. To date the m-FISH is the best setup for the assessment of the chromosome structural damage: it allows stable and instable aberrations to be detected all over the karyotype. Stable ones such as balanced translocations, are not eliminated due to cell-cycle as unstable ones, so they are considered transmissible markers for retrospective dosimetry. The induction of chromosome damage showed a clear dependence on dose delivered; unstable aberrations were demonstrated after doses of 0.1 Gy, and stable aberrations after doses higher than 0.5 Gy. Summarizing, q-FISH is unfit to report low exposures while m-FISH provides better results: unstable aberrations are sensible short-term reporters, while stable ones long report exposures but with a higher induction threshold.
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.