ArticlePloS one2020
Response of human oral mucosal epithelial cells to different storage temperatures: A structural and transcriptional study.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative Transcriptomic Analyses for the Optimization of Thawing Regimes during Conventional Cryopreservation of Mature and Immature Human Testicular Tissue.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeSeeking to improve the access to regenerative medicine, this study investigated the structural and transcriptional effects of storage temperature on human oral mucosal epithelial cells (OMECs).
methodsCells were stored at four different temperatures (4°C, 12°C, 24°C and 37°C) for two weeks. Then, the morphology, cell viability and differential gene expression were examined using light and scanning electron microscopy, trypan blue exclusion test and TaqMan gene expression array cards, respectively.
resultsCells stored at 4°C had the most similar morphology to non-stored controls with the highest viability rate (58%), whereas the 37°C group was most dissimilar with no living cells. The genes involved in stress-induced growth arrest (GADD45B) and cell proliferation inhibition (TGFB2) were upregulated at 12°C and 24°C. Upregulation was also observed in multifunctional genes responsible for morphology, growth, adhesion and motility such as EFEMP1 (12°C) and EPHA4 (4°C-24°C). Among genes used as differentiation markers, PPARA and TP53 (along with its associated gene CDKN1A) were downregulated in all temperature conditions, whereas KRT1 and KRT10 were either unchanged (4°C) or downregulated (24°C and 12°C; and 24°C, respectively), except for upregulation at 12°C for KRT1.
conclusionsCells stored at 12°C and 24°C were stressed, although the expression levels of some adhesion-, growth- and apoptosis-related genes were favourable. Collectively, this study suggests that 4°C is the optimal storage temperature for maintenance of structure, viability and function of OMECs after two weeks.
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.