ArticlePharmaceutical biology2022
Assessing potential liver injury induced by
Article in Pharmaceutical biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dietary supplementation with Cuscuta chinensis improves ovarian function and production performance in aged laying hens via modulation of steroid hormone biosynthesis and gut microbiota.Poultry science · 2026Article
- Comprehensive and high-coverage glycerophospholipidomic analysis based on iterative quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry and its application in cerebral ischemia-reperfusion injury.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Psoraleae Fructus Ethanol Extract Induced Hepatotoxicity via Impaired Lipid Metabolism Caused by Disruption of Fatty AcidOxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2023Article
- Discovery of Hepatotoxic Equivalent Markers and Mechanism ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A Network-Pharmacology-Combined Integrated Pharmacokinetic Strategy to Investigate the Mechanism of Potential Liver Injury due toMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
context
objectiveTo assess PM-induced liver injury, identify sensitive assessment indicators, and screen for new biomarkers using sphingolipidomics. MATERIALS AND
methodsMale Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats were randomly divided into four groups (control, model with low-, middle- and high-dose groups,
resultsThe maximal tolerable dose (MTD) of PM administered intragastrically to mice was 51 g/kg. Sphingolipid profiling of normal and PM-induced liver injury SD rats revealed three potential biomarkers: ceramide (Cer) (d18:1/24:1), dihydroceramide (d18:1/18:0)-1-phosphate (dhCer (d18:1/18:0)-1P) and Cer (d18:1/26:1), at 867.3-1349, 383.4-1527, and 540.5-658.7 ng/mL, respectively. A criterion for the ratio of Cer (d18:1/24:1) and Cer (d18:1/26:1) was suggested and verified, with a normal range of 1.343-2.368 (with 95% confidence interval) in plasma.
conclusionsThree potential biomarkers and one criterion for potential liver injury caused by PM that may be more sensitive than ALT and AST were found.
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.