ArticleAnalytical chemistry2018
Method for Biomonitoring DNA Adducts in Exfoliated Urinary Cells by Mass Spectrometry.
Article in Analytical chemistry, 2018. 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.
- Aromatic amine exposure and bladder cancer: a review of recent advances in epidemiology, pathogenesis, and prevention.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Simultaneous RNA and DNA Adductomics Using Single Data-Independent Acquisition Mass Spectrometry Analysis.Chemical research in toxicology · 2023Article
- Comparison of gas chromatographic techniques for the analysis of iodinated derivatives of aromatic amines.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2023Article
- Nucleic acid adductomics - The next generation of adductomics towards assessing environmental health risks.The Science of the total environment · 2023Article
- Aristolochic acid-associated cancers: a public health risk in need of global action.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2022Review
- Unbiased enrichment of urine exfoliated cells on nanostructured substrates for sensitive detection of urothelial tumor cells.Cancer medicine · 2020Observational
- Emerging Technologies in Mass Spectrometry-Based DNA Adductomics.High-throughput · 2019Review
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
Abstract
Tobacco smoking contributes to about 50% of the bladder-cancer (BC) cases in the United States. Some aromatic amines in tobacco smoke are bladder carcinogens; however, other causal agents of BC are uncertain. Exfoliated urinary cells (EUCs) are a promising noninvasive biospecimen to screen for DNA adducts of chemicals that damage the bladder genome, although the analysis of DNA adducts in EUCs is technically challenging because of the low number of EUCs and limiting quantity of cellular DNA. Moreover, EUCs and their DNA adducts must remain viable during the time of collection and storage of urine to develop robust screening methods. We employed RT4 cells, a well-differentiated transitional epithelial bladder cell line, as a cell-model system in urine to investigate cell viability and the chemical stability of DNA adducts of two prototypical bladder carcinogens: 4-aminobiphenyl (4-ABP), an aromatic amine found in tobacco smoke, and aristolochic acid I (AA-I), a nitrophenanthrene found in Aristolochia herbaceous plants used for medicinal purposes worldwide. The cell viability of RT4 cells pretreated with 4-ABP or AA-I in urine exceeded 80%, and the major DNA adducts of 4-ABP and AA-I, quantified by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry, were stable for 24 h. Thereafter, we successfully screened EUCs of mice treated with AA-I to measure DNA adducts of AA-I, which were still detected 25 days following treatment with the carcinogen. EUCs are promising biospecimens that can be employed for the screening of DNA adducts of environmental and dietary genotoxicants that may contribute to the development of BC.
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.