Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31565039›Full record

ArticleDose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society

What Can Chemical Carcinogenesis Shed Light on the LNT Hypothesis in Radiation Carcinogenesis?

James E Trosko

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

James E TroskoDepartment Pediatrics and Human Development, College of Human Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1359-0778
Michigan State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To protect the public's health from exposure to physical, chemical, and microbiological agents, it is important that any policy be based on rigorous scientifically based research. The concept of "linear no-threshold" (LNT) has been implemented to provide guideline exposures to these agents. The practical limitation to testing this hypothesis is to provide sufficient samples for experimental or epidemiological studies. While there is no universally accepted understanding of most human diseases, there seems to be better understanding of cancer that might help resolve the "LNT" model. The public's concern, after being exposed to radiation, is the potential of producing cancer. The most rigorous hypothesis of human carcinogenesis is the "multistage, multimechanism" chemical carcinogenesis model. The radiation carcinogenesis LNT model, rarely, if ever, built it into their support. It will be argued that this multistage, multimechanism model of carcinogenesis, involving the "initiation" of a single cell by a mutagen event, followed by chronic exposure to threshold levels of epigenetic agents or conditions that stimulate the clonal expansion of the "initiated" cell, can convert these benign cells to become invasive and metastatic. This "promotion" process can be interrupted, thereby preventing these initiated cells from transitioning to the "progression" process of invasion and metastasis.

Indexed as

cell–cell communicationepigenetic mechanismserrors of DNA repairerrors of DNA replicationmultistage carcinogenesisorgan-specific adult stem cellstumor promotion

Identifiers

PMID31565039
PMCPMC6755642
OpenAlexW2973427379

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.