ArticleCurrent opinion in toxicology2017
Dioxin and the AH Receptor: Synergy of Discovery.
Article in Current opinion in toxicology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dioxins and the One Health Paradigm: An Interdisciplinary Challenge in Environmental Toxicology.Toxics · 2025Review
- The complex biology of aryl hydrocarbon receptor activation in cancer and beyond.Biochemical pharmacology · 2023Review
- Human Adult Microbiota in a Static Colon Model: AhR Transcriptional Activity at the Crossroads of Host-Microbe Interaction.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Immunotoxicity of Xenobiotics in Fish: A Role for the Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor (AhR)?International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor and Dioxin-Related Health Hazards-Lessons from Yusho.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- The Ah Receptor: Adaptive Metabolism, Ligand Diversity, and the Xenokine Model.Chemical research in toxicology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Why the interest in dioxins, a group of structurally related chemicals which have a common mechanism of action, a common spectrum of biological responses and are environmentally and biologically persistent? A plethora of effects have been reported in people, wildlife, and domestic animals since chloracne was first described in 1899. Cattle, horses, sheep, and chickens have all been shown to be affected during poisoning episodes with polychlorinated byphenyls (PCBs). Fish, birds, and marine mammals have shown adverse outcomes, such as loss of reproduction and immune suppression, at environmental levels. And in the laboratory, species from all vertebrate classes have been used to study the biological effects from exposure to dioxins [1]. While chloracne is diagnostic of poisoning by dioxins, it is only associated with high levels of exposure. However, industrial accidents such as in Nitro, West Virginia, in 1949, Seveso, Italy in 1976, the polybrominated biphenyl (PBB) flame retardant poisoning in Michigan in 1973, and the Binghamton office building fire in 1981, all resulted in some chloracne. In addition, other human poisonings, such as that due to PCB/polychorinated dibenzofuran (PCDF) contaminated rice oil in Japan in 1968 ("Yusho") and Taiwan in 1979 ("Yucheng"), demonstrated a wide range of toxic effects, both on those who ingested the contaminated oil and on their children born afterwards. Intentional poisoning by 2,3,7,8-tetrachloridibenzo-
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.