ArticleToxins2020
Functional Study of
Article in Toxins, 2020. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cytolethal distending toxin enhancesInfection and immunity · 2026Article
- Cytolethal Distending Toxin EnhancesbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Therapeutic potential of fecal microbiota transplantation in colorectal cancer based on gut microbiota regulation: from pathogenesis to efficacy.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Extracellular Vesicles fromInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- ABToxins · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The Cytolethal Distending Toxin (CDT) is produced by many Gram-negative pathogenic bacteria responsible for major foodborne diseases worldwide. CDT induces DNA damage and cell cycle arrest in host-cells, eventually leading to senescence or apoptosis. According to structural and sequence comparison, the catalytic subunit CdtB is suggested to possess both nuclease and phosphatase activities, carried by a single catalytic site. However, the impact of each activity on cell-host toxicity is yet to be characterized. Here, we analyze the consequences of cell exposure to different CDT mutated on key CdtB residues, focusing on cell viability, cell cycle defects, and DNA damage induction. A first class of mutant, devoid of any activity, targets putative catalytic (H160A), metal binding (D273R), and DNA binding residues (R117A-R144A-N201A). The second class of mutants (A163R, F156-T158, and the newly identified G114T), which gathers mutations on residues potentially involved in lipid substrate binding, has only partially lost its toxic effects. However, their defects are alleviated when CdtB is artificially introduced inside cells, except for the F156-T158 double mutant that is defective in nuclear addressing. Therefore, our data reveal that CDT toxicity is mainly correlated to CdtB nuclease activity, whereas phosphatase activity may probably be involved in CdtB intracellular trafficking.
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.