Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Different concentrations of the methylxanthine/purine analogues aminophylline and 61-tartrat, were tested on in vitro-incubated embryonic avian cells from duck line DEC 99, as well as of mammalian embryonic cells from bovine line EBTr and mouse fibroblast line 3T3. In all cases, the C\(C₅₀\)/ml cell suspension, presenting the cytotoxic concentration, in which were observed 50% death or changes, was determined. On the avian embryonic cells, the determined values of the methylxantine/purine analogues were 2.4x \(10⁻⁶\) M/L about the aminophylline and 2.1x \(10⁻⁶\) M/L about the 61-tartrat. The assessed C\(C₅₀\)/mL of the same compounds on the mammalian cells were 2.4x \(10⁻⁵\) M/L about the aminophylline and 2.1x \(10⁻⁵\) M/L about the 61-tartrat, respectively. The embryonic mammalian cells were more resistant to both substances than the embryonic avian cells. On the other hand, the assessed values of both C\(C₅₀\)/ml and maximal non-toxic concentration (MNC - in which no cellular mortality or other changes can be detected) of each one of the two methylxantine/purine analogues were very near about EBTr and 3T3 mammalian cell lines, and the mouse cells, which are proved as widely used experimental in vitro-model, showed some advantages in both cases. In this way, the current data suggest a possibility about application of methylxantine/purine derivatives about genetic and/or epigenetic reparations, on DNA- and mRNA-levels of low differentiated mammalian cells.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sainova et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: