The DOI matches its Crossref record.
In vitro assays for detecting carcinogenic mineral fibres: a comparison of two assays and the role of fibre size
Abstract
The activities of 13 carcinogenic fibrous dust samples were compared in two in vitro test systems using V79/4 and A549 cells. Eleven of the dusts had similar ranks in both assays but two samples had disparate results. The relationship between the fibre length and diameter distributions of 12 of the samples and their activity in each assay was examined. A significant association between fibre length and biological activity occurred in both assays. This relationship showed increasing strength of association with increasing fibre length. The only significant association between fibre diameter and activity in vitro was demonstrated with fibres greater than 0.2 micron in the A549 assay.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The results showed a correlation for a fiber length greater than 3 μm (V79/4) or 4 μm (A549 cells). The correlation improved as the length increased.”
From Quantification of short and long asbestos fibers to assess asbestos exposure: A review of fiber size toxicity (2014) · cites this paper as [82]
In the citing paper
“For diameter, the only significant association was related to the fiber diameter <0.2 μm (A549).”
From Quantification of short and long asbestos fibers to assess asbestos exposure: A review of fiber size toxicity (2014) · cites this paper as [82]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Boulanger, G., Andujar, P., Pairon, J.-C., Billon-Galland, M.-A., Dion, C., Dumortier, P., Brochard, P., Sobaszek, A., Bartsch, P., Paris, C., et al. (2014) · Environmental Health · doi:10.1186/1476-069x-13-59 · Cited by 176
Bernstein, D., Castranova, V., Donaldson, K., Fubini, B., Hadley, J., Hesterberg, T., Kane, A., Lai, D., McConnell, E. E., Muhle, H., et al. (2005) · Inhalation Toxicology · doi:10.1080/08958370591001121 · Cited by 103
Self-citationGraham, A., Higinbotham, J., Allan, D., Donaldson, K., & Beswick, P. H. (1999) · Occupational and Environmental Medicine · doi:10.1136/oem.56.9.606 · Cited by 18
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Brown, G. M., Cowie, H., Davis, J. M. G., & Donaldson, K.
- Venue
- Carcinogenesis
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1986
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1971-1974
- ISSN
- 0143-3334
- 1460-2180
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
