Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24572876›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery2014

Prophylactic amifostine preserves the biomechanical properties of irradiated bone in the murine mandible.

Peter A Felice, Salman Ahsan, Joseph E Perosky, Sagar S Deshpande, Noah S Nelson, Alexis Donneys, Kenneth M Kozloff, Steven R Buchman

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Peter A FeliceAnn Arbor, Mich.; and Columbia, S.C. From the Craniofacial Research Laboratory, Plastic Surgery Section, and the Orthopaedic Research Laboratory, Orthopaedic Surgery Section, University of Michigan; and the Department of General Surgery, University of South Carolina School of Medicine.
Salman Ahsan
Joseph E Perosky
Sagar S Deshpande
Noah S Nelson
Alexis Donneys
Kenneth M Kozloff
Steven R Buchman
University of South Carolina · USBio-Medical Science (South Korea) · KR

Funding

Translational Optimization of Bone Regeneration in the Irradiated MandibleR01CA125187 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI BUCHMAN, STEVEN R · 2007 to 2017
$2.8M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA125187NCI NIH HHS R01 CA 125187-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe authors have previously demonstrated that amifostine prophylaxis mitigates the pernicious effects of radiation in settings of fracture repair and distraction osteogenesis. Expanding on these studies, the authors examined the biomechanical properties of uninjured bone exposed to both radiation and amifostine. The authors hypothesize that radiation will degrade the biomechanical properties of native bone, and further hypothesize that prophylactic amifostine will preserve biomechanical properties to levels of normal bone and protect against radiation-induced morbidities.

methodsRats were randomized into control, irradiated, and amifostine pretreatment plus radiation (amifostine-pretreated) groups. Irradiated animals received a fractionated dosing schedule of 35 Gy, with amifostine-pretreated animals receiving amifostine before irradiation. Hemimandibles were harvested at 8 and 18 weeks for biomechanical testing and micro-computed tomographic analysis.

resultsAt 8 weeks, irradiated specimens displayed elevations above controls for all biomechanical properties. At 18 weeks, the biomechanical properties of irradiated specimens degraded in comparison with controls; at both time points, amifostine-pretreated specimens were maintained at levels comparable to controls. There was a significant decrease in tissue mineral density from 8- to 18-week irradiated specimens, whereas no such change existed for control and amifostine-pretreated specimens.

conclusionsThe authors' findings demonstrate paradoxical and transient elevations in the initial biomechanical properties of irradiated specimens that were not sustained through the later study time point. Amifostine pretreatment, however, provided uninterrupted preservation of the biomechanical properties of normal, native bone at both time points. This supports the contention that amifostine is capable of providing continuous protection to bone against the untoward effects of radiation therapy.

Indexed as

AmifostineAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaBone DiseasesChemopreventionDose Fractionation, RadiationMaleMandibleRadiation Injuries, ExperimentalRadiation-Protective AgentsRatsRats, Sprague-DawleyAmifostineRadiation-Protective Agents

Identifiers

PMID24572876
PMCPMC4163550
OpenAlexW1975059251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.