2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.etap.2016.09.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The influence of maternal smoking on transferrin sialylation and fetal biometric parameters

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The assessment of cotinine levels confirmed that the level of exposure to tobacco smoke used in this study is equivalent to that of smokers [73][74][75][76] . As for ethanol blood concentrations, they are comparable to those a human fetus would be exposed to after maternal ingestion of a moderate to heavy dose of ethanol 83 .…”
Section: Body Mass Cotinine and Ethanol Levelssupporting
confidence: 73%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The assessment of cotinine levels confirmed that the level of exposure to tobacco smoke used in this study is equivalent to that of smokers [73][74][75][76] . As for ethanol blood concentrations, they are comparable to those a human fetus would be exposed to after maternal ingestion of a moderate to heavy dose of ethanol 83 .…”
Section: Body Mass Cotinine and Ethanol Levelssupporting
confidence: 73%
“…The smoking machine generates a single 35-ml, 2-s puff per min, containing 89% sidestream smoke (smoke released from the burning end of a cigarette) and 11% mainstream smoke (smoke from the puff stream), as a surrogate for active smoking [49][50][51]71,72 . The pattern of tobacco smoke exposure used in this study 72 generates cotinine (nicotine metabolite) serum levels that are within the range of those found in smokers [73][74][75][76] . Control mice were exposed to ambient air in a chamber identical to the one used for smoke exposure.…”
Section: Animals and Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…30 One possible explanation for our observations would be a modulation of the effect of smoking by pregnancy, although the findings of other recent work are generally inconsistent with this idea. 31 To simplify interpretation of the FS-SRM results, it was decided that statistical analyses should focus on variation that could not be formally explained by differences in protein concentration. Thus, an attempt was made to correct for these differences using simple normalization (eq S1), for which the compositional analysis (see above) and the result in Figure 5A provided some justification.…”
Section: ■ Experimental Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%