Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25370150›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2014

The effect of fluorescent nanodiamonds on neuronal survival and morphogenesis.

Yung-An Huang, Chun-Wei Kao, Kuang-Kai Liu, Hou-Syun Huang, Ming-Han Chiang, Ching-Ren Soo, Huan-Cheng Chang, Tzai-Wen Chiu, Jui-I Chao, Eric Hwang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 76 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Time for NanoNeuro.Nature methods · 2021
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yung-An Huang1] Department of Biological Science and Technology, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan [2] Institute of Bioinformatics and Systems Biology, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan.
Chun-Wei Kao1] Department of Biological Science and Technology, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan [2] Institute of Molecular Medicine and Bioengineering, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan.
Kuang-Kai LiuDepartment of Biological Science and Technology, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan.
Hou-Syun Huang1] Department of Biological Science and Technology, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan [2] Institute of Atomic and Molecular Sciences, Academia Sinica, Taipei 10672, Taiwan.
Ming-Han ChiangInstitute of Molecular Medicine and Bioengineering, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan.
Ching-Ren SooInstitute of Molecular Medicine and Bioengineering, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan.
Huan-Cheng ChangInstitute of Atomic and Molecular Sciences, Academia Sinica, Taipei 10672, Taiwan.
Tzai-Wen Chiu1] Department of Biological Science and Technology, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan [2] Institute of Molecular Medicine and Bioengineering, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan.
Jui-I Chao1] Department of Biological Science and Technology, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan [2] Institute of Molecular Medicine and Bioengineering, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan.
Eric Hwang1] Department of Biological Science and Technology, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan [2] Institute of Bioinformatics and Systems Biology, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan [3] Institute of Molecular Medicine and Bioengineering, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 30068, Taiwan.
National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University · TWInstitute of Atomic and Molecular Sciences, Academia Sinica · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanodiamond (ND) has emerged as a promising carbon nanomaterial for therapeutic applications. In previous studies, ND has been reported to have outstanding biocompatibility and high uptake rate in various cell types. ND containing nitrogen-vacancy centers exhibit fluorescence property is called fluorescent nanodiamond (FND), and has been applied for bio-labeling agent. However, the influence and application of FND on the nervous system remain elusive. In order to study the compatibility of FND on the nervous system, neurons treated with FNDs in vitro and in vivo were examined. FND did not induce cytotoxicity in primary neurons from either central (CNS) or peripheral nervous system (PNS); neither did intracranial injection of FND affect animal behavior. The neuronal uptake of FNDs was confirmed using flow cytometry and confocal microscopy. However, FND caused a concentration-dependent decrease in neurite length in both CNS and PNS neurons. Time-lapse live cell imaging showed that the reduction of neurite length was due to the spatial hindrance of FND on advancing axonal growth cone. These findings demonstrate that FNDs exhibit low neuronal toxicity but interfere with neuronal morphogenesis, and should be taken into consideration when applications involve actively growing neurites (e.g. nerve regeneration).

Indexed as

AnimalsCells, CulturedCell ShapeCell SurvivalFluorescent DyesGanglia, SpinalHippocampusMice, Inbred C57BLNanodiamondsNeuronsPrimary Cell CultureFluorescent DyesNanodiamonds

Identifiers

PMID25370150
PMCPMC4220284
OpenAlexW1995247091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.