ArticleActa ophthalmologica2018
Levels of oxidative DNA damage are low in ex vivo engineered human limbal epithelial tissue.
Article in Acta ophthalmologica, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- DNA Oxidation and Expression of Repair Enzymes in Organ- Cultured Human Limbal Epithelium.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- DNA damage in oral mucosal epithelial cells cultured in complex and xenobiotic-free media: a comparison study.Mutagenesis · 2025Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo examine levels of oxidative DNA base damage and expression of selected genes and proteins related to DNA damage repair in human limbal epithelium engineered ex vivo.
methodsCells were expanded from limbal tissue on cell culture-treated inserts in medium containing fetal bovine serum, recombinant growth factors, hormones and cholera toxin (COM) and in medium with human serum as the single growth-promoting additive (HS). Cells were analysed after two, three and four weeks in culture for DNA strand breaks and oxidized purine bases (Comet assay using the enzyme formamidopyrimidine DNA glycosylase, Fpg) and for expression of DNA repair enzymes APE1, OGG1 and Polβ by in situ hybridization (ISH) and by immunohistochemistry (IHC).
resultsLevels of strand breaks were substantial while levels of net Fpg-sensitive sites (8-oxoguanine and ring-opened FaPy bases) were relatively low in cells engineered in COM and in HS. Both types of medium were found to support expression of base excision repair (BER) enzymes APE1, OGG1 and Polβ at the gene level. At the protein level, expression of APE1 and OGG1 was noticeable in both conditions while expression of Polβ was low.
conclusionOur findings indicate low levels of oxidative stress and/or efficient DNA purine base damage repair in human limbal epithelium engineered in a medium with human serum as the single growth-promoting additive as well as in traditional medium with xenobiotics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.