ArticlePloS one2016
Evaluation of the Genetic Response of U937 and Jurkat Cells to 10-Nanosecond Electrical Pulses (nsEP).
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modulation of inflammatory response by electromagnetic field in Neuronal and Microglial cells.Journal of surgery and research · 2025Article
- Evaluation of genetic response of mesenchymal stem cells to nanosecond pulsed electric fields by whole transcriptome sequencing.World journal of stem cells · 2024Article
- Pulsed Electric Fields Alter Expression of NF-κB Promoter-Controlled Gene.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Nanosecond Pulsed Electric Field Only Transiently Affects the Cellular and Molecular Processes of Leydig Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Caveolin-1 is Involved in Regulating the Biological Response of Cells to Nanosecond Pulsed Electric Fields.The Journal of membrane biology · 2021Article
- Intracellular Delivery by Membrane Disruption: Mechanisms, Strategies, and Concepts.Chemical reviews · 2018Review
- Adult human dermal fibroblasts exposed to nanosecond electrical pulses exhibit genetic biomarkers of mechanical stress.Biochemistry and biophysics reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nanosecond electrical pulse (nsEP) exposure activates signaling pathways, produces oxidative stress, stimulates hormone secretion, causes cell swelling and induces apoptotic and necrotic death. The underlying biophysical connection(s) between these diverse cellular reactions and nsEP has yet to be elucidated. Using global genetic analysis, we evaluated how two commonly studied cell types, U937 and Jurkat, respond to nsEP exposure. We hypothesized that by studying the genetic response of the cells following exposure, we would gain direct insight into the stresses experienced by the cell and in turn better understand the biophysical interaction taking place during the exposure. Using Ingenuity Systems software, we found genes associated with cell growth, movement and development to be significantly up-regulated in both cell types 4 h post exposure to nsEP. In agreement with our hypothesis, we also found that both cell lines exhibit significant biological changes consistent with mechanical stress induction. These results advance nsEP research by providing strong evidence that the interaction of nsEPs with cells involves mechanical stress.
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.