ArticleJournal of nutrition and metabolism2014
Reliability of a Fully Automated Interpretation of γ -H2AX Foci in Lymphocytes of Moderately Trained Subjects under Resting Conditions.
Article in Journal of nutrition and metabolism, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Changes in γH2AX and H4K16ac levels are involved in the biochemical response to a competitive soccer match in adolescent players.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Analysis of Lymphocytic DNA Damage in Early Multiple Sclerosis by Automated Gamma-H2AX and 53BP1 Foci Detection: A Case Control Study.PloS one · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background. Analysis of γ-H2AX foci is a promising approach to evaluate exercise-induced DNA damage. However, baseline levels and day-to-day variability of γ-H2AX foci have not been investigated in healthy subjects at rest. Methods. Blood was taken from eight moderately trained healthy males (29 ± 3 yrs, 1.84 ± 0.03 m, and 85 ± 6 kg) at two separate days (M1/M2) after 24-hour exercise cessation. Number of γ-H2AX foci per 100 lymphocytes (N), number of foci per affected lymphocyte (NAL), percentage of affected lymphocytes (PAL), and diameter (D) of γ-H2AX foci were analyzed (mean ± SD). Differences between M1 and M2 were analyzed using paired t-tests (α = 0.05). Day-to-day variability was evaluated by calculating the coefficients of variation (CV%), bias, and limits of agreement (LoA). Results. There were no statistically significant differences between M1 (N: 7.6 ± 4.4, NAL: 1.2 ± 0.2, PAL: 5.9 ± 2.6%, and D: 0.63 ± 0.07) and M2 (N: 8.4 ± 4.6, NAL: 1.3 ± 0.1, PAL: 6.9 ± 4.2%, and D: 0.66 ± 0.06). CV was calculated to be 98.5% (N), 88.9% (PAL), 11.3% (NAL), and 8.0% (D). Bias (LoA) was 0.75 (-15.2/13.7), -0.02 (-0.36/0.33), -1.0 (-11.9/9.9), and -0.04 (-0.16/0.09), respectively. Conclusions. Background level in healthy subjects is approximately 0.07 to 0.09 γ-H2AX foci/cell. NAL and D are reliable measures.
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.