ArticleArchives of toxicology2024
Investigating the applicability domain of the hiPSC-based PluriLum assay: an embryotoxicity assessment of chemicals and drugs.
Article in Archives of toxicology, 2024. 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.
- Embryotoxicity of pyrethroid insecticides and their mixtures in a human induced pluripotent stem cell-based model in vitro.Archives of toxicology · 2026Article
- In Vitro Bioassay Evidence for Chemical Mixture Propagation from the Environment to Humans.Environmental science & technology · 2026Article
- Embryotoxicity and mixture effects of legacy PFAS in a human iPSC-based 3D model.Cell biology and toxicology · 2026Article
- Single-cell RNA sequencing reveals tissue-specific transcriptomic changes induced by perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) in larval zebrafish (Danio rerio).Journal of hazardous materials · 2025Article
- Standardization and optimization of the hiPSC-based PluriLum assay for detection of embryonic and developmental toxicants.Archives of toxicology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To meet the growing demand for developmental toxicity assessment of chemicals, New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) are needed. Previously, we developed two 3D in vitro assays based on human-induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSC) and cardiomyocyte differentiation: the PluriBeat assay, based on assessment of beating differentiated embryoid bodies, and the PluriLum assay, a reporter gene assay based on the expression of the early cardiac marker NKX2.5; both promising assays for predicting embryotoxic effects of chemicals and drugs. In this work, we aimed to further describe the predictive power of the PluriLum assay and compare its sensitivity with PluriBeat and similar human stem cell-based assays developed by others. For this purpose, we assessed the toxicity of a panel of ten chemicals from different chemical classes, consisting of the known developmental toxicants 5-fluorouracil, all-trans retinoic acid and valproic acid, as well as the negative control compounds ascorbic acid and folic acid. In addition, the fungicides epoxiconazole and prochloraz, and three perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), PFOS, PFOA and GenX were tested. Generally, the PluriLum assay displayed higher sensitivity when compared to the PluriBeat assay. For several compounds the luminescence readout of the PluriLum assay showed effects not detected by the PluriBeat assay, including two PFAS compounds and the two fungicides. Overall, we find that the PluriLum assay has the potential to provide a fast and objective detection of developmental toxicants and has a level of sensitivity that is comparable to or higher than other in vitro assays also based on human stem cells and cardiomyocyte differentiation for assessment of developmental toxicity.
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.