Effect of electromagnetic fields on several CD markers and transcription and expression of CD4.
← Research streamFlow cytometry showed CD surface marker expression was weakly influenced overall, with no differences between exposed and non-exposed cells for several markers. Evidence of CD4 protein production was reported in lymphocytes exposed to ELF-EMF (immunofluoresce…
Study snapshot
Abstract
We carried out flow cytometric analysis for multiparametric evaluation of cell surface markers related to cellular functions. Specifically, we studied the expression of CD4, CD8, CD3, CD16, CD19, HLA-DR, and CD14 macrophage receptors expression and cell cycle progression on cells exposed to ELF-EMF. In addition, we tested the effects of ELF-EMF on CD4 mRNA protein transcription and translation and the cell-cycle progression using an immunofluorescence method. Our data show that same CD surface marker expression are weakly influenced by electromagnetic fields, with no differences between cells exposed or not exposed to ELF-EMFs. However, when the CD4 protein generation was studied, an indication of protein production was found in lymphocytes exposed to ELF-EMF, as evidenced by immunofluorescence, Western blotting and RT-PCR analysis. CD16 and CD14 expression were affected by EMF exposure at all times studied (24, 48, 72 h). The results obtained with cell cycle analysis show that after 48 h of exposure to ELF-EMF, PHA-activated and not activated cells in S phase increase with respect to non-exposed cells. The findings from this study demonstrate that under our defined experimental conditions there is evidence that ELF-EMF has a slight effect on CD4, CD14 and CD16 receptor expression, while the other CD receptors are not affected.
AI evidence extraction
Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.
Main findings
Flow cytometry showed CD surface marker expression was weakly influenced overall, with no differences between exposed and non-exposed cells for several markers. Evidence of CD4 protein production was reported in lymphocytes exposed to ELF-EMF (immunofluorescence, Western blotting, RT-PCR). CD16 and CD14 expression were affected at 24, 48, and 72 h, and after 48 h exposure an increase in S-phase cells was observed versus non-exposed cells.
Outcomes measured
- Cell surface marker expression (CD4, CD8, CD3, CD16, CD19, HLA-DR, CD14)
- CD4 mRNA/protein transcription and translation (RT-PCR, Western blot, immunofluorescence)
- Cell-cycle progression (S phase; PHA-activated and non-activated cells)
Limitations
- Exposure parameters (e.g., field strength, frequency) not provided in the abstract
- In vitro study; generalizability to humans not established in the abstract
- Sample size and statistical details not reported in the abstract
View raw extracted JSON
{
"study_type": "in_vitro",
"exposure": {
"band": "ELF",
"source": null,
"frequency_mhz": null,
"sar_wkg": null,
"duration": "24, 48, 72 h"
},
"population": null,
"sample_size": null,
"outcomes": [
"Cell surface marker expression (CD4, CD8, CD3, CD16, CD19, HLA-DR, CD14)",
"CD4 mRNA/protein transcription and translation (RT-PCR, Western blot, immunofluorescence)",
"Cell-cycle progression (S phase; PHA-activated and non-activated cells)"
],
"main_findings": "Flow cytometry showed CD surface marker expression was weakly influenced overall, with no differences between exposed and non-exposed cells for several markers. Evidence of CD4 protein production was reported in lymphocytes exposed to ELF-EMF (immunofluorescence, Western blotting, RT-PCR). CD16 and CD14 expression were affected at 24, 48, and 72 h, and after 48 h exposure an increase in S-phase cells was observed versus non-exposed cells.",
"effect_direction": "mixed",
"limitations": [
"Exposure parameters (e.g., field strength, frequency) not provided in the abstract",
"In vitro study; generalizability to humans not established in the abstract",
"Sample size and statistical details not reported in the abstract"
],
"evidence_strength": "low",
"confidence": 0.74,
"peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
"keywords": [
"ELF-EMF",
"in vitro",
"flow cytometry",
"CD markers",
"CD4",
"CD14",
"CD16",
"RT-PCR",
"Western blot",
"immunofluorescence",
"cell cycle",
"lymphocytes",
"PHA"
],
"suggested_hubs": []
}AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.
Identifiers and source
DOI: 10.1016/s0171-2985(99)80045-x
PubMed: 10532279
Related papers
- Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields do not alter the cell cycle progression of C3H 10T and U87MG cells. 2001
- Impact of extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields on CD4 expression in peripheral blood mononuclear cells. 1999
- Genotoxicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields on mammalian cells in vitro: A systematic 2024
- Cellular and Molecular Effects of Magnetic Fields 2024
- Effects of 5G radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on indicators of vitality and DNA integrity of in vitro exposed boar semen 2024
- On the origin of the biological effects of time varying magnetic fields: quantitative insights 2024