Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29261810›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Whole genome microarray analysis of neural progenitor C17.2 cells during differentiation and validation of 30 neural mRNA biomarkers for estimation of developmental neurotoxicity.

Kristina Attoff, Anda Gliga, Jessica Lundqvist, Ulf Norinder, Anna Forsby

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Antibacterial mechanism of areca nut essential oils againstFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Mercury Toxicity and Neurogenesis in the Mammalian Brain.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kristina AttoffDepartment of Neurochemistry, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6611-0785
Anda GligaInstitute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jessica LundqvistDepartment of Neurochemistry, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ulf NorinderSwetox, Karolinska Institutet, Unit of Toxicology Sciences, Södertälje, Sweden.
Anna ForsbyDepartment of Neurochemistry, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
Stockholm University · SEKarolinska Institutet · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite its high relevance, developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) is one of the least studied forms of toxicity. Current guidelines for DNT testing are based on in vivo testing and they require extensive resources. Transcriptomic approaches using relevant in vitro models have been suggested as a useful tool for identifying possible DNT-generating compounds. In this study, we performed whole genome microarray analysis on the murine progenitor cell line C17.2 following 5 and 10 days of differentiation. We identified 30 genes that are strongly associated with neural differentiation. The C17.2 cell line can be differentiated into a co-culture of both neurons and neuroglial cells, giving a more relevant picture of the brain than using neuronal cells alone. Among the most highly upregulated genes were genes involved in neurogenesis (CHRDL1), axonal guidance (BMP4), neuronal connectivity (PLXDC2), axonogenesis (RTN4R) and astrocyte differentiation (S100B). The 30 biomarkers were further validated by exposure to non-cytotoxic concentrations of two DNT-inducing compounds (valproic acid and methylmercury) and one neurotoxic chemical possessing a possible DNT activity (acrylamide). Twenty-eight of the 30 biomarkers were altered by at least one of the neurotoxic substances, proving the importance of these biomarkers during differentiation. These results suggest that gene expression profiling using a predefined set of biomarkers could be used as a sensitive tool for initial DNT screening of chemicals. Using a predefined set of mRNA biomarkers, instead of the whole genome, makes this model affordable and high-throughput. The use of such models could help speed up the initial screening of substances, possibly indicating alerts that need to be further studied in more sophisticated models.

Indexed as

GenomeAcrylamideAnimalsBiomarkersCell DifferentiationCell LineCell SurvivalGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression RegulationMannitolMethylmercury CompoundsMiceMicroarray AnalysisNeural Stem CellsNeurotoxicity SyndromesPrincipal Component AnalysisAcrylamideBiomarkersMannitolMethylmercury CompoundsRNA, MessengerValproic Acid

Identifiers

PMID29261810
PMCPMC5738075
OpenAlexW2776177612

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.