Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36828477›Full record

ReviewToxins2023

A Review on Genotoxic and Genoprotective Effects of Biologically Active Compounds of Animal Origin.

Nikolajs Sjakste, Goran Gajski

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Toxins, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Genotoxic Activity ofBiology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Iranian journal of veterinary research · 2025
    Article
  6. A potential antifungal bioproduct for Microsporum canis: Bee venom.The Onderstepoort journal of veterinary research · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Nikolajs SjaksteDepartment of Medical Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Latvia, 1004 Riga, Latvia.
Goran GajskiMutagenesis Unit, Institute for Medical Research and Occupational Health, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0002-1886-1453
Institute for Medical Research and Occupational Health · HRUniversity of Latvia · LV

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Envenomation by animal venoms remains a serious medical and social problem, especially in tropical countries. On the other hand, animal venoms are widely used as a source of biologically active compounds for the development of novel drugs. Numerous derivatives of animal venoms are already used in clinical practice. When analysing the mechanisms of action of animal venoms, attention is usually focused on the main target of the venom's enzymes and peptides such as neurotoxic, cytotoxic or haemorrhagic effects. In the present review, we would like to draw attention to the "hidden" effects of animal venoms and their derivatives in regard to DNA damage and/or protection against DNA damage. Alkaloids and terpenoids isolated from sponges such as avarol, ingenamine G or variolin B manifest the capability to bind DNA

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsMelittenAnimalsBeesDNA DamageAntineoplastic AgentsMelittenDNA damagedrugsgenotoxicityinvertebratespharmaceuticalstherapeutic applicationvenomvertebrates

Identifiers

PMID36828477
PMCPMC9961038
OpenAlexW4321377198

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.