Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35678845›Full record

ArticleArchives of toxicology2022

How to avoid misinterpretation of dual reporter gene assay data affected by cell damage.

Julie Nilles, Johanna Weiss, Walter E Haefeli, Stephanie Ruez, Dirk Theile

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of toxicology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 45% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Julie NillesDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacoepidemiology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Johanna WeissDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacoepidemiology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Walter E HaefeliDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacoepidemiology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Stephanie RuezBoehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Birkendorfer Str. 65, 88397, Biberach an der Riss, Germany.
Dirk TheileDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacoepidemiology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. dirk.theile@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID 0000-0003-4720-9242
Heidelberg University · DEBoehringer Ingelheim (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The activity of nuclear receptors (e.g., pregnane x receptor, PXR) can be assessed by luminescence-based dual reporter gene assays. Under most conditions, receptor-activated firefly luminescence is normalized to Renilla luminescence, which is triggered by a constitutively active promoter. Simultaneous damage to the cells can however disrupt these signals and thus impair the interpretation of the data. Consequently, this study addressed three important aspects: First, idealized models were described, each highlighting crucial characteristics and important pitfalls of dual PXR reporter gene assays used to evaluate PXR activation or inhibition. Second, these models were supported by experimental data obtained with a strong PXR activator (rifampicin) with low cytotoxicity, a PXR activator with high cytotoxicity (dovitinib), a proposed PXR inhibitor that reportedly has no toxic effects (triptolide), and a cytotoxic control (oxaliplatin). Data were evaluated for relative PXR activity data, individual firefly or Renilla luminescence, and anti-proliferative effects of the compounds (assessed by crystal violet staining). Finally, a step-by-step guide is proposed to avoid misleading set-up of the assay or misinterpretation of the data obtained. Key considerations here include (1) omission of drug concentrations beyond 10-20% proliferation inhibition; (2) observation of Renilla luminescence, because this tends to indicate 'false PXR activation' when it inexplicably decreases; (3) parallel decrease of relative PXR activity and proliferation below baseline levels in conjunction with a sharp decrease in Renilla luminescence indicates 'false PXR antagonism'; (4) non-sigmoidal relationships suggest the absence of concentration dependency.

Indexed as

Receptors, SteroidCytochrome P-450 CYP3AGenes, ReporterReceptors, Cytoplasmic and NuclearRifampinCytochrome P-450 CYP3AReceptors, Cytoplasmic and NuclearReceptors, SteroidRifampinCytotoxicityFireflyPregnane x receptorRenillaReporter gene assay

Identifiers

PMID35678845
PMCPMC9325833
OpenAlexW4281671693

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.