Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35249130›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2022

Studies on safety and efficacy of particles containing a mixture of hydroxyapatite-argentum-titanium oxide (HAT) and sheets coated with HAT particles to be used in masks to improve nasal allergy: II. Cellular, in vivo, and clinical studies.

Narumi Okazaki, Dai Yamaki, Toshio Takei, Miyuki Shimizu, Naoyuki Kamatani, Takayuki Shindo

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Narumi OkazakiDR.C Medical Medicine Co. Ltd., Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan. okazaki@drciyaku.co.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7380-995X
Dai YamakiDR.C Medical Medicine Co. Ltd., Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5320-2819
Toshio TakeiDR.C Medical Medicine Co. Ltd., Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8434-2555
Miyuki ShimizuMedical Lab Partners Corporation, Chiyoda, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7057-2210
Naoyuki KamataniStaGen Co. Ltd., Taito, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2878-3372
Takayuki ShindoDepartment of Cardiovascular Research, Shinshu University School of Medicine, Matsumoto, Nagano, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1262-0819
Shinshu University · JPStaGen (Japan) · JPTokyo Medical University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe report the manufacture of particles containing a mixture of hydroxyapatite-argentum-titanium oxide (HAT), followed by attachment to nonwoven polyester fabrics to produce HAT-coated sheets (HATS) for use in masks. The purpose of the present study was to perform cellular, in vivo, and clinical studies to further examine the safety of HATS for use in masks to improve nasal allergy.

methodsReverse mutation tests for HAT were performed using five bacterial strains. A cellular toxicity test was performed using a Chinese hamster cell line incubated with the HATS extracts. Skin reactions after intradermal administration were examined in rabbits. Skin sensitization tests in guinea pigs were performed using the HATS extracts. HAT was administered to the nasal cavity and conjunctival sac of the rabbits. An oral administration study was performed in rats. Finally, a human skin patch test was performed using the HATS.

resultsReverse mutation tests showed negative results. The cellular toxicity test showed that the HATS extract had moderate cytotoxicity. The intradermal skin reaction and skin sensitization tests were all negative. The administration of HAT to the nasal cavity and intraocular administration showed negative results. No toxicity was observed after oral administration of HAT powder up to a dose of 2000 mg/kg. Finally, the skin patch test result was negative.

conclusionAlthough HAT showed moderate cytotoxicity, in vivo results indicated that HAT is safe because it does not come in direct contact with cells in normal usage, and HATS is safe when used in masks.

Indexed as

CosmeticsHypersensitivityAnimalsCricetinaeDurapatiteGuinea PigsHumansMasksRabbitsRatsTitaniumCosmeticsDurapatiteTitaniumtitanium dioxideCedar pollinosisHydroxyapatiteMite allergyNasal allergyPhotocatalysisTitanium oxide

Identifiers

PMID35249130
PMCPMC9363370
OpenAlexW4220872266

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.