Effects of EMF on cultured human retinal pigment epithelial cells

PAPER manual 2018 In vitro study Effect: mixed Evidence: Low

Read original paper → DOI: 10.1002/bem.22154 Evidence Lab

Abstract

Effects of EMF on cultured human retinal pigment epithelial cells Nasrabadi N, Soheili ZS, Bagheri A, Ahmadieh H, Amizadeh Y, Sahebjam F, Tabeie F, Rezaei Kanavi M. The effects of electromagnetic fields on cultured human retinal pigment epithelial cells. Bioelectromagnetics. 2018 Dec;39(8):585-594. doi: 10.1002/bem.22154. Abstract A great deal of evidence has confirmed that electromagnetic fields (EMFs) can affect the central nervous system. In this study, cultured neonatal human retinal pigment epithelial (hRPE) cells were exposed to pulsed EMF of 1 mT intensity and 50 Hz frequency 8 h daily for 3 days. In addition to cell proliferation and cell death assays, immunocytochemistry for RPE65, PAX6, nestin, and cytokeratin 8/18 proteins were performed. Real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was performed for NES, PAX6, RPE65, and ACTA2 gene expression. Exposed hRPE cells did not demonstrate significant change in terms of cytomorphology, cell proliferation, or cell death. Protein expression of PAX6 was decreased in treated cells compared to controls and remained unchanged for RPE65, cytokeratin 8/18, and nestin. Gene expressions of NES, RPE65, and PAX6 were decreased in treated cells as compared to controls. Gene expression of ACTA2 did not significantly change. In conclusion, viability of cultivated neonatal hRPE cells did not change after short exposure to a safe dose of pulsed EMF albeit that both gene and protein expressions of retinal progenitor cell markers were reduced. Whether longer exposure durations that are being constantly produced by widely-used electronic devices may induce significant changes in these cells, needs further investigation. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

AI evidence extraction

At a glance

Study type

In vitro study

Effect direction

mixed

Population

Cultured neonatal human retinal pigment epithelial (hRPE) cells

Sample size

—

Exposure

ELF · 0.05 MHz · 8 h daily for 3 days

Evidence strength

Low

Confidence: 78% · Peer-reviewed: yes

Main findings

Cultured neonatal hRPE cells exposed to pulsed EMF (1 mT, 50 Hz; 8 h/day for 3 days) showed no significant changes in cytomorphology, proliferation, or cell death. PAX6 protein expression and NES/RPE65/PAX6 gene expression were decreased versus controls, while RPE65, cytokeratin 8/18, nestin protein expression and ACTA2 gene expression did not significantly change.

Outcomes measured

Cell cytomorphology
Cell proliferation
Cell death/viability
Protein expression (RPE65, PAX6, nestin, cytokeratin 8/18)
Gene expression (NES, PAX6, RPE65, ACTA2)

Limitations

In vitro cell culture model
Short exposure duration (3 days)
Sample size not reported in abstract

Suggested hubs

occupational-exposure (0.15)
Study involves ELF (50 Hz) exposure parameters that can be relevant to occupational/ELF exposure contexts, though the source is not specified.

View raw extracted JSON

{
    "study_type": "in_vitro",
    "exposure": {
        "band": "ELF",
        "source": null,
        "frequency_mhz": 0.05000000000000000277555756156289135105907917022705078125,
        "sar_wkg": null,
        "duration": "8 h daily for 3 days"
    },
    "population": "Cultured neonatal human retinal pigment epithelial (hRPE) cells",
    "sample_size": null,
    "outcomes": [
        "Cell cytomorphology",
        "Cell proliferation",
        "Cell death/viability",
        "Protein expression (RPE65, PAX6, nestin, cytokeratin 8/18)",
        "Gene expression (NES, PAX6, RPE65, ACTA2)"
    ],
    "main_findings": "Cultured neonatal hRPE cells exposed to pulsed EMF (1 mT, 50 Hz; 8 h/day for 3 days) showed no significant changes in cytomorphology, proliferation, or cell death. PAX6 protein expression and NES/RPE65/PAX6 gene expression were decreased versus controls, while RPE65, cytokeratin 8/18, nestin protein expression and ACTA2 gene expression did not significantly change.",
    "effect_direction": "mixed",
    "limitations": [
        "In vitro cell culture model",
        "Short exposure duration (3 days)",
        "Sample size not reported in abstract"
    ],
    "evidence_strength": "low",
    "confidence": 0.7800000000000000266453525910037569701671600341796875,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
    "keywords": [
        "electromagnetic fields",
        "pulsed EMF",
        "ELF",
        "50 Hz",
        "1 mT",
        "retinal pigment epithelial cells",
        "hRPE",
        "PAX6",
        "RPE65",
        "NES",
        "ACTA2",
        "gene expression",
        "protein expression",
        "cell viability"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": [
        {
            "slug": "occupational-exposure",
            "weight": 0.1499999999999999944488848768742172978818416595458984375,
            "reason": "Study involves ELF (50 Hz) exposure parameters that can be relevant to occupational/ELF exposure contexts, though the source is not specified."
        }
    ]
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract/metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This content is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice.

Comments

No comments yet.