ReviewEnvironmental science and pollution research international2021
Epimutational effects of electronic cigarettes.
Review in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epigenomic Dysregulation in Youth Vapers: Implications for Disease Risk Assessment.American journal of respiratory cell and molecular biology · 2025Article
- Vaping and tumor metastasis: current insights and progress.Cancer metastasis reviews · 2024Review
- The Untapped Biomarker Potential of MicroRNAs for Health Risk-Benefit Analysis of Vaping vs. Smoking.Cells · 2024Review
- Exploring the Utility of Long Non-Coding RNAs for Assessing the Health Consequences of Vaping.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Epigenetic effects of herbal medicine.Clinical epigenetics · 2023Review
- The Knowledge and Attitude about New Generation Tobacco Products among Physicians.Turkish thoracic journal · 2022Article
- Using ncRNAs as Tools in Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment-The Way towards Personalized Medicine to Improve Patients' Health.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Transfer of Metals to the Aerosol Generated by an Electronic Cigarette: Influence of Number of Puffs and Power.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Modifiable and Non-Modifiable Risk Factors for the Development of Non-Hereditary Pancreatic Cancer.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Review
- Turkish Thoracic Society's Statement Report on Electronic Cigarettes and Heated Tobacco Products.Turkish thoracic journal · 2022Article
- Role of Extracellular Vesicles in Compromising Cellular Resilience to Environmental Stressors.BioMed research international · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), since they do not require tobacco combustion, have traditionally been considered less harmful than conventional cigarettes (c-cigarettes). In recent years, however, researchers have found many toxic compounds in the aerosols of e-cigarettes, and numerous studies have shown that e-cigarettes can adversely affect the human epigenome. In this review, we provide an update on recent findings regarding epigenetic outcomes of e-cigarette aerosols. Moreover, we discussed the effects of several typical e-cigarette ingredients (nicotine, tobacco-specific nitrosamines, volatile organic compounds, carbonyl compounds, and toxic metals) on DNA methylation, histone modifications, and noncoding RNA expression. These epigenetic effects could explain some of the diseases caused by e-cigarettes. It also reminds the public that like c-cigarettes, inhaling e-cigarette aerosols could also be accompanied with potential epigenotoxicity on the human body.
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.