Cited by 24

Adverse effects of Sudanese toombak vs. Swedish snuff on human oral cells

Costea, Daniela Elena, Lukandu, Ochiba, Bui, Linh, Ibrahim, Muna Jaffar M., Lygre, Raymond, Neppelberg, Evelyn, Ibrahim, Salah Osman, Vintermyr, Olav Karsten +1 more·2010·Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine

Abstract

Background The high incidence of oral cancer in Sudan has been associated with the use of toombak, the local type of smokeless tobacco. However, its specific effects on human oral cells are not known. We aimed to investigate the effects of toombak on primary normal human oral keratinocytes, fibroblasts, and a dysplastic oral keratinocytic cell line, and to compare them with the effects induced by Swedish snuff. Method Aqueous extracts were prepared from moist toombak and Swedish snuff and added in serial dilutions on in vitro monolayer cultured cells. Cell viability, morphology and growth, DNA double-strand breaks (gammaH2AX staining), expression of phosphatidylserine (Annexin V staining), and cell cycle were assessed after various exposure time periods. Results Significant decrease in cell number, occurrence of DNA double-strain breaks, morphological and biochemical signs of programmed cell death were detected in all oral cell types exposed to clinically relevant dilutions of toombak extract, although to a lesser extent in normal oral fibroblasts and dysplastic keratinocytes. G2/M-block was also detected in normal oral keratinocytes and fibroblasts exposed to clinically relevant dilutions of toombak extract. Swedish snuff extract had less adverse effects on oral cells, mainly at non-clinically relevant dilutions. Conclusion This study indicates a potential for toombak, higher than for Swedish snuff, to damage human oral epithelium. Dysplastic oral keratinocytes were less sen…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1600-0714.2009.00825.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Authors
Costea, D. E., Lukandu, O., Bui, L., Ibrahim, M. J. M., Lygre, R., Neppelberg, E., Ibrahim, S. O., Vintermyr, O. K., & Johannessen, A. C.
Venue
Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-02
Volume
39
Issue
2
Pages
128-140
ISSN
  • 0904-2512
  • 1600-0714
Cited by
24
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