Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24260392›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

Transcriptomic analysis reveals novel mechanistic insight into murine biological responses to multi-walled carbon nanotubes in lungs and cultured lung epithelial cells.

Sarah Søs Poulsen, Nicklas R Jacobsen, Sarah Labib, Dongmei Wu, Mainul Husain, Andrew Williams, Jesper P Bøgelund, Ole Andersen, Carsten Købler, Kristian Mølhave and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing 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

38 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Evaluation ofIranian journal of biotechnology · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

16 authors.

Sarah Søs PoulsenNational Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark ; Department of Science, Systems and Models, Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark.
Nicklas R Jacobsen
Sarah Labib
Dongmei Wu
Mainul Husain
Andrew Williams
Jesper P Bøgelund
Ole Andersen
Carsten Købler
Kristian Mølhave
Zdenka O Kyjovska
Anne T Saber
Håkan Wallin
Carole L Yauk
Ulla Vogel
Sabina Halappanavar

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is great interest in substituting animal work with in vitro experimentation in human health risk assessment; however, there are only few comparisons of in vitro and in vivo biological responses to engineered nanomaterials. We used high-content genomics tools to compare in vivo pulmonary responses of multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT) to those in vitro in cultured lung epithelial cells (FE1) at the global transcriptomic level. Primary size, surface area and other properties of MWCNT- XNRI -7 (Mitsui7) were characterized using DLS, SEM and TEM. Mice were exposed via a single intratracheal instillation to 18, 54, or 162 μg of Mitsui7/mouse. FE1 cells were incubated with 12.5, 25 and 100 μg/ml of Mitsui7. Tissue and cell samples were collected at 24 hours post-exposure. DNA microarrays were employed to establish mechanistic differences and similarities between the two models. Microarray results were confirmed using gene-specific RT-qPCR. Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid was assessed for indications of inflammation in vivo. A strong dose-dependent activation of acute phase and inflammation response was observed in mouse lungs reflective mainly of an inflammatory response as observed in BAL. In vitro, a wide variety of core cellular functions were affected including transcription, cell cycle, and cellular growth and proliferation. Oxidative stress, fibrosis and inflammation processes were altered in both models. Although there were similarities observed between the two models at the pathway-level, the specific genes altered under these pathways were different, suggesting that the underlying mechanisms of responses are different in cells in culture and the lung tissue. Our results suggest that careful consideration should be given in selecting relevant endpoints when substituting animal with in vitro testing.

Indexed as

TranscriptomeAnimalsBronchoalveolar Lavage FluidCells, CulturedCluster AnalysisEnvironmental ExposureEpithelial CellsFemaleGene Expression ProfilingGene Regulatory NetworksInflammationLungMiceMolecular Sequence AnnotationNanotubes, CarbonParticle SizeNanotubes, Carbon

Identifiers

PMID24260392
PMCPMC3834097

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.