Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35724941›Full record

ArticleJournal of dentistry2022

Efficacy and hazards of 425 nm oral cavity light dosing to inactivate SARS-CoV-2.

Max A Stockslager, Jacob F Kocher, Leslee Arwood, Nathan Stasko, Rebecca A McDonald, Mark A Tapsak, David Emerson

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of dentistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07610967 (Light-based Immunomodulation for Guarding Against Human Respiratory Tract Infections), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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.

NCT07610967 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Light-based Immunomodulation for Guarding Against Human Respiratory Tract Infections

TypeinterventionalSponsorDavid MossRan2026 to 2028Enrolled130ConditionsCOVID-19 Respiratory Infection, InfluenzaArmsRD-X19, RD-X19 Sham
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Max A StockslagerEmitBio Inc., 4222 Emperor Blvd, Suite 470, Durham, NC 27703, United States. Electronic address: mstockslager@emitbio.com.
Jacob F KocherEmitBio Inc., 4222 Emperor Blvd, Suite 470, Durham, NC 27703, United States.
Leslee ArwoodEmitBio Inc., 4222 Emperor Blvd, Suite 470, Durham, NC 27703, United States.
Nathan StaskoEmitBio Inc., 4222 Emperor Blvd, Suite 470, Durham, NC 27703, United States.
Rebecca A McDonaldEmitBio Inc., 4222 Emperor Blvd, Suite 470, Durham, NC 27703, United States.
Mark A TapsakEmitBio Inc., 4222 Emperor Blvd, Suite 470, Durham, NC 27703, United States.
David EmersonEmitBio Inc., 4222 Emperor Blvd, Suite 470, Durham, NC 27703, United States.
Myanmar Institute of Information Technology · MM

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveUsing a battery of preclinical tests to support development of a light-based treatment for COVID-19, establish a range of 425 nm light doses that are non-hazardous to the tissues of the oral cavity and assess whether a 425 nm light dose in this non-hazardous range can inactivate SARS-CoV-2 in artificial saliva.

methodsThe potential hazards to oral tissues associated with a range of acute 425 nm light doses were assessed using a battery of four preclinical tests: (1) cytotoxicity, using well-differentiated human large airway and buccal epithelial models; (2) toxicity to commensal oral bacteria, using a panel of model organisms; (3) light-induced histopathological changes, using ex vivo porcine esophageal tissue, and (4) thermal damage, by dosing the oropharynx of intact porcine head specimens. Then, 425 nm light doses established as non-hazardous using these tests were evaluated for their potential to inactivate SARS-CoV-2 in artificial saliva.

resultsA dose range was established at which 425 nm light is not cytotoxic in well-differentiated human large airway or buccal epithelial models, is not cytotoxic to a panel of commensal oral bacteria, does not induce histopathological damage in ex vivo porcine esophageal tissue, and does not induce thermal damage to the oropharynx of intact porcine head specimens. Using these tests, no hazards were observed for 425 nm light doses less than 63 J/cm

conclusionPreclinical hazard assessments and SARS-CoV-2 inactivation efficacy testing were combined to guide the development of a 425 nm light-based treatment for COVID-19. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The process used here to evaluate the potential hazards associated with 425 nm acute light dosing of the oral cavity to treat COVID-19 can be extended to other wavelengths, anatomical targets, and therapeutic applications to accelerate the development of novel photomedicine treatments.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2AnimalsHumansMouthOropharynxSalivaSaliva, ArtificialSwineSaliva, ArtificialCOVID-19CytotoxicityHazard analysisLightPhotomedicineSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID35724941
PMCPMC9212724
OpenAlexW4283069856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.