ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2017
Microvesicles Contribute to the Bystander Effect of DNA Damage.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-Term Cardiac Damage Associated With Abdominal Irradiation in Mice.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- The Bystander Effect of Ultraviolet Radiation and Mediators.Journal of biomedical physics & engineering · 2020Review
- Exosomal MiR-769-5p Exacerbates Ultraviolet-Induced Bystander Effect by TargetingFrontiers in physiology · 2020Article
- DNA Injury and Repair Systems.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genotoxic treatments elicit DNA damage response (DDR) not only in cells that are directly exposed but also in cells that are not in the field of treatment (bystander cells), a phenomenon that is commonly referred to as the bystander effect (BE). However, mechanisms underlying the BE remain elusive. We report here that etoposide and ultraviolet (UV) exposure stimulate the production of microvesicles (MVs) in DU145 prostate cancer cells. MVs isolated from UV-treated DU145 and A431 epidermoid carcinoma cells as well as etoposide-treated DU145 cells induced phosphorylation of ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) at serine 1981 (indicative of ATM activation) and phosphorylation of histone H2AX at serine 139 (γH2AX) in naïve DU145 cells. Importantly, neutralization of MVs derived from UV-treated cells with annexin V significantly reduced the MV-associated BE activities. Etoposide and UV are known to induce DDR primarily through the ATM and ATM- and Rad3-related (ATR) pathways, respectively. In this regard, MV is likely a common source for the DNA damage-induced bystander effect. However, pre-treatment of DU145 naïve cells with an ATM (KU55933) inhibitor does not affect the BE elicited by MVs isolated from etoposide-treated cells, indicating that the BE is induced upstream of ATM actions. Taken together, we provide evidence supporting that MVs are a source of the DNA damage-induced bystander effect.
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.