Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32218170›Full record

ArticleGenes2020

Assessment of Genotoxicity in Human Cells Exposed to Modulated Electromagnetic Fields of Wireless Communication Devices.

David Schuermann, Christina Ziemann, Zeinab Barekati, Myles Capstick, Antje Oertel, Frauke Focke, Manuel Murbach, Niels Kuster, Clemens Dasenbrock, Primo Schär

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

10 authors.

David SchuermannDepartment of Biomedicine, University of Basel, Mattenstrasse 28, CH-4058 Basel, Switzerland.
Christina ZiemannFraunhofer Institute for Toxicology and Experimental Medicine ITEM, Nikolai-Fuchs-Strasse 1, D-30625 Hannover, Germany.
Zeinab BarekatiDepartment of Biomedicine, University of Basel, Mattenstrasse 28, CH-4058 Basel, Switzerland.
Myles CapstickIT'IS Foundation, Zeughausstrasse 43, CH-8004 Zurich, Switzerland.
Antje OertelFraunhofer Institute for Toxicology and Experimental Medicine ITEM, Nikolai-Fuchs-Strasse 1, D-30625 Hannover, Germany.
Frauke FockeDepartment of Biomedicine, University of Basel, Mattenstrasse 28, CH-4058 Basel, Switzerland.
Manuel MurbachIT'IS Foundation, Zeughausstrasse 43, CH-8004 Zurich, Switzerland.
Niels KusterIT'IS Foundation, Zeughausstrasse 43, CH-8004 Zurich, Switzerland.
Clemens DasenbrockFraunhofer Institute for Toxicology and Experimental Medicine ITEM, Nikolai-Fuchs-Strasse 1, D-30625 Hannover, Germany.
Primo SchärDepartment of Biomedicine, University of Basel, Mattenstrasse 28, CH-4058 Basel, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modulated electromagnetic fields (wEMFs), as generated by modern communication technologies, have raised concerns about adverse health effects. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies them as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" (Group 2B), yet, the underlying molecular mechanisms initiating and promoting tumorigenesis remain elusive. Here, we comprehensively assess the impact of technologically relevant wEMF modulations on the genome integrity of cultured human cells, investigating cell type-specificities as well as time- and dose-dependencies. Classical and advanced methodologies of genetic toxicology and DNA repair were applied, and key experiments were performed in two separate laboratories. Overall, we found no conclusive evidence for an induction of DNA damage nor for alterations of the DNA repair capacity in cells exposed to several wEMF modulations (i.e., GSM, UMTS, WiFi, and RFID). Previously reported observations of increased DNA damage after exposure of cells to GSM-modulated signals could not be reproduced. Experimental variables, presumably underlying the discrepant observations, were investigated and are discussed. On the basis of our data, we conclude that the possible carcinogenicity of wEMF modulations cannot be explained by an effect on genome integrity through direct DNA damage. However, we cannot exclude non-genotoxic, indirect, or secondary effects of wEMF exposure that may promote tumorigenesis in other ways.

Indexed as

DNA DamageCell PhoneCells, CulturedDNA RepairElectromagnetic FieldsFibroblastsHumansLungWireless TechnologyDNA damageDNA repairelectromagnetic fieldsenvironment and public healthgenomic instabilitygenotoxicityGSMRFIDUMTSWiFi

Identifiers

PMID32218170
PMCPMC7230863

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.