ArticleChemical research in toxicology2024
Human Keratinocyte Responses to Woodsmoke Chemicals.
Article in Chemical research in toxicology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Air pollution consists of complex mixtures of chemicals with serious deleterious health effects from acute and chronic exposure. To help understand the mechanisms by which adverse effects occur, the present work examines the responses of cultured human epidermal keratinocytes to specific chemicals commonly found in woodsmoke. Our earlier findings with liquid smoke flavoring (aqueous extract of charred wood) revealed that such extracts stimulated the expression of genes associated with oxidative stress and proinflammatory response, activated the aryl hydrocarbon receptor, thereby inducing cytochrome P4501A1 activity, and induced cross-linked envelope formation, a lethal event ordinarily occurring during terminal differentiation. The present results showed that furfural produced transcriptional responses resembling those of liquid smoke, cyclohexanedione activated the aryl hydrocarbon receptor, and several chemicals induced envelope formation. Of these, syringol permeabilized the cells to the egress of lactate dehydrogenase at a concentration close to that yielding envelope formation, while furfural induced envelope formation without permeabilization detectable in this way. Furfural (but not syringol) stimulated the incorporation of amines into cell proteins in extracts in the absence of transglutaminase activity. Nevertheless, both chemicals substantially increased the amount of cellular protein incorporated into envelopes and greatly altered the envelope protein profile. Moreover, the proportion of keratin in the envelopes was dramatically increased. These findings are consistent with the chemically induced protein cross-linking in the cells. Elucidating mechanisms by which this phenomenon occurs may help understand how smoke chemicals interact with proteins to elicit cellular responses, interpret bioassays of complex pollutant mixtures, and suggest additional sensitive ways to monitor exposures.
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.