This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
Evidence overwhelmingly supports the view that we need to drastically reduce our consumption of animal products for reasons related to the environment and public health, while moral concerns about the treatment of animals in agriculture are becoming ever more common. As governments increasingly recognize the need to change our food production and alternative protein products become more appealing to consumers, agriculture finds itself in a unique period of transition. How do farmers respond to the changing atmosphere? We present secondary analyses of qualitative and quantitative data to highlight some of the uncertainty and ambivalence about meat production felt throughout the farming community. Survey data from France and Germany reveals that in both countries, those who work in the meat industry have significantly higher rates of meat avoidance than those who do not work in the industry. While non-meat-industry workers are more likely to cite concerns for animals or the environment, meat industry workers more often cite concerns about the healthiness or safety of the products. Concurrently, interviews with people who raise animals for a living suggest that moral concerns among farmers are growing but largely remain hidden; talking about them openly was felt as a form of betrayal. We discuss these findings in the context of the ongoing agricultural transition, observe how tension has manifested as polarization among Dutch farmers, and offer some thoughts about the role of farmers in a new world of alternative proteins.
Christopher J. Bryant; Cor van der Weele. The farmers’ dilemma: Meat, means, and morality. Appetite 2021, 167, 105605 .
AMA StyleChristopher J. Bryant, Cor van der Weele. The farmers’ dilemma: Meat, means, and morality. Appetite. 2021; 167 ():105605.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher J. Bryant; Cor van der Weele. 2021. "The farmers’ dilemma: Meat, means, and morality." Appetite 167, no. : 105605.
Despite growing evidence of the environmental and public health threats posed by today’s intensive animal production, consumers in the west remain largely attached to meat. Cultivated meat offers a way to grow meat directly from cells, circumventing these issues as well as the use of animals altogether. The aim of this study was to assess the overall consumer markets and a range of preferences around cultivated meat in the US and the UK relating to nomenclature, genetic modification, health enhancements, and other features. To this end, we recruited large representative samples to participate in an online survey about cultivated meat, and subsequently analyzed segments (a) in the early majority population (guided by the Diffusion of Innovations Model), (b) by generation, and (c) in the general population. Our findings showed a high level of openness (80%) in both the US and UK populations, with 40% somewhat or moderately likely to try and 40% highly likely to try. Younger generations had the greatest openness: 88% of Gen Z, 85% of Millennials, 77% of Gen X, and 72% of Baby Boomers were at least somewhat open to trying cultivated meat. All segments envisioned cultivated meat to be nearly half of their total meat intake. Findings show that consumers prefer the terms ‘cultured’ and ‘cultivated’ over ‘cell-based’ and ‘cell-cultured’ for use in a social context and on packages, even though they perceive these terms as less descriptive. The most important on-package label was one indicating government assurances, and participants preferred non-GM products over GM products. We also found that US consumers prefer nutritionally superior meat over nutritionally equivalent meat. We discuss implications for product development, messaging, and understanding the likely adoption path of this food innovation.
Keri Szejda; Christopher Bryant; Tessa Urbanovich. US and UK Consumer Adoption of Cultivated Meat: A Segmentation Study. Foods 2021, 10, 1050 .
AMA StyleKeri Szejda, Christopher Bryant, Tessa Urbanovich. US and UK Consumer Adoption of Cultivated Meat: A Segmentation Study. Foods. 2021; 10 (5):1050.
Chicago/Turabian StyleKeri Szejda; Christopher Bryant; Tessa Urbanovich. 2021. "US and UK Consumer Adoption of Cultivated Meat: A Segmentation Study." Foods 10, no. 5: 1050.
Alternatives to conventional meat are considered an increasingly important tool in the drive to reduce consumption of animal products for environmental, public health and ethical reasons. We present two waves of a cross-sectional survey from a nationally representative sample in Belgium in 2019 (n = 1001) and 2020 (n = 1000). Participants answered questions online about their diets, attitudes towards existing plant-based meat alternatives, and attitudes towards cultured meat (grown from animal cells). We find that the proportion of Belgian consumers who said existing plant-based meat alternatives met their needs increased significantly from 44% in 2019 to 51% in 2020. We also find a significant increase in concern for issues related to animal agriculture, in particular the environment. We found no significant change in attitudes towards cultured meat between the two waves; in both 2019 and 2020, 39.3% of Belgian consumers said they would buy cultured meat. Regression analyses revealed that plant-based alternatives were more appealing to women and those with vegetarian diets, whilst cultured meat was more appealing to men. Overall, just 11.2% of consumers are both unsatisfied with existing meat alternatives and unwilling to buy cultured meat, while 43.2% of respondents were positive towards either plant-based or cultured meat, but not both, highlighting the need for a variety of alternative proteins in the market. Both cultured meat and plant-based meat were more appealing to younger consumers and those in the northern, predominantly Dutch-speaking region of Flanders. We discuss the implications of these findings for researchers and those seeking to strategically displace demand for animal products.
Christopher Bryant; Hermes Sanctorum. Alternative proteins, evolving attitudes: Comparing consumer attitudes to plant-based and cultured meat in Belgium in two consecutive years. Appetite 2021, 161, 105161 .
AMA StyleChristopher Bryant, Hermes Sanctorum. Alternative proteins, evolving attitudes: Comparing consumer attitudes to plant-based and cultured meat in Belgium in two consecutive years. Appetite. 2021; 161 ():105161.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher Bryant; Hermes Sanctorum. 2021. "Alternative proteins, evolving attitudes: Comparing consumer attitudes to plant-based and cultured meat in Belgium in two consecutive years." Appetite 161, no. : 105161.
The negative impacts of meat consumption for animals, the environment, and human health are more pressing than ever. Although some evidence points to an ongoing reduction in meat consumption in Europe, consumers are overall unwilling to cut their meat consumption in a substantial way. The present study investigates dietary identities and perceptions of cultured meat in nationally representative samples from Germany (n = 1000) and France (n = 1000). Participants were recruited through an Ipsos panel to answer an online survey, which included questions about their current and intended consumption of conventional meat, as well as questions about their opinions of cultured meat. We find that, whilst rates of vegetarianism were relatively low in France, unrestricted meat-eaters were a minority in Germany, and concern for animal welfare was the most common reason given for meat reduction. Substantial markets for cultured meat exist in both countries, although German consumers are significantly more open to the concept than the French. Strikingly, cultured meat acceptance is significantly higher amongst agricultural and meat workers, indicating that those who are closest to existing meat production methods are most likely to prefer alternatives. We found some evidence that pro-cultured meat messages, which focus on antibiotic resistance and food safety, are significantly more persuasive than those that focus on animals or the environment. Furthermore, consumers project that they would be significantly more likely to consume cultured meat that does not contain genetically modified ingredients. Overall, we find substantially large markets for cultured meat in Germany and France, and identify some potential ways to further increase acceptance in these markets. We conclude by highlighting the most promising markets for cultured meat, and highlighting a lack of antibiotics as a potentially persuasive message about cultured meat.
Christopher Bryant; Lea Van Nek; Nathalie C. M. Rolland. European Markets for Cultured Meat: A Comparison of Germany and France. Foods 2020, 9, 1152 .
AMA StyleChristopher Bryant, Lea Van Nek, Nathalie C. M. Rolland. European Markets for Cultured Meat: A Comparison of Germany and France. Foods. 2020; 9 (9):1152.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher Bryant; Lea Van Nek; Nathalie C. M. Rolland. 2020. "European Markets for Cultured Meat: A Comparison of Germany and France." Foods 9, no. 9: 1152.
Cultured meat grown in vitro from animal cells has the potential to address many of the ethical, environmental, and public health issues associated with conventional meat production. However, as well as overcoming technical challenges to producing cultured meat, producers and advocates of the technology must consider a range of social issues, including consumer appeal and acceptance, media coverage, religious status, regulation, and potential economic impacts. Whilst much has been written on the prospects for consumer appeal and acceptance of cultured meat, less consideration has been given to the other aspects of the social world that will interact with this new technology. Here, each of these issues is considered in turn, forming a view of cultured meat as a technology with a diverse set of societal considerations and far-reaching social implications. It is argued that the potential gains from a transition to cultured meat are vast, but that cultural phenomena and institutions must be navigated carefully for this nascent industry to meet its potential.
Christopher J Bryant. Culture, meat, and cultured meat. Journal of Animal Science 2020, 98, 1 .
AMA StyleChristopher J Bryant. Culture, meat, and cultured meat. Journal of Animal Science. 2020; 98 (8):1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher J Bryant. 2020. "Culture, meat, and cultured meat." Journal of Animal Science 98, no. 8: 1.
Cultured meat is one of a number of alternative proteins which can help to reduce the demand for meat from animals in the future. As cultured meat nears commercialization, research on consumers’ perceptions of the technology has proliferated. We build on our 2018 systematic review to identify 26 empirical studies on consumer acceptance of cultured meat published in peer-reviewed journals since then. We find support for many of the findings of our previous review, as well as novel insights into the market for cultured meat. We find evidence of a substantial market for cultured meat in many countries, as well as markets and demographics which are particularly open to the concept. Consumers mostly identified animal- and environment-related benefits, but there is plenty of potential to highlight personal benefits such as health and food safety. The safety of cultured meat and its nutritional qualities are intuitively seen as risks by some consumers, although some recognize potential benefits in these areas. Evidence suggests that acceptance can be increased with positive information, as well as frames which invoke more positive associations. We conclude by arguing that cultured meat will form one part of a varied landscape of future protein sources, each appealing to different groups of consumers to achieve an overall reduction in conventional meat consumption. We acknowledge a range of pro-cultured meat messaging strategies, and suggest that framing cultured meat as a solution to existing food safety problems may be an effective approach to increase acceptance. In the long-term, objections based in neophobia and norm violation will decrease, and widespread acceptance will depend in large part on the price and taste.
Christopher Bryant; Julie Barnett. Consumer Acceptance of Cultured Meat: An Updated Review (2018–2020). Applied Sciences 2020, 10, 5201 .
AMA StyleChristopher Bryant, Julie Barnett. Consumer Acceptance of Cultured Meat: An Updated Review (2018–2020). Applied Sciences. 2020; 10 (15):5201.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher Bryant; Julie Barnett. 2020. "Consumer Acceptance of Cultured Meat: An Updated Review (2018–2020)." Applied Sciences 10, no. 15: 5201.
Cellular agriculture is an emerging branch of biotechnology that aims to address issues associated with the environmental impact, animal welfare and sustainability challenges of conventional animal farming for meat production. Cultured meat can be produced by applying current cell culture practices and biomanufacturing methods and utilizing mammalian cell lines and cell and gene therapy products to generate tissue or nutritional proteins for human consumption. However, significant improvements and modifications are needed for the process to be cost efficient and robust enough to be brought to production at scale for food supply. Here, we review the scientific and social challenges in transforming cultured meat into a viable commercial option, covering aspects from cell selection and medium optimization to biomaterials, tissue engineering, regulation and consumer acceptance.
Mark J. Post; Shulamit Levenberg; David L. Kaplan; Nicholas Genovese; Jianan Fu; Christopher Bryant; Nicole Negowetti; Karin Verzijden; Panagiota Moutsatsou. Scientific, sustainability and regulatory challenges of cultured meat. Nature Food 2020, 1, 403 -415.
AMA StyleMark J. Post, Shulamit Levenberg, David L. Kaplan, Nicholas Genovese, Jianan Fu, Christopher Bryant, Nicole Negowetti, Karin Verzijden, Panagiota Moutsatsou. Scientific, sustainability and regulatory challenges of cultured meat. Nature Food. 2020; 1 (7):403-415.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMark J. Post; Shulamit Levenberg; David L. Kaplan; Nicholas Genovese; Jianan Fu; Christopher Bryant; Nicole Negowetti; Karin Verzijden; Panagiota Moutsatsou. 2020. "Scientific, sustainability and regulatory challenges of cultured meat." Nature Food 1, no. 7: 403-415.
Corrigendum: A Survey of Consumer Perceptions of Plant-Based and Clean Meat in the USA, India, and China
Christopher Bryant; Keri Szejda; Nishant Parekh; Varun Deshpande; Brian Tse. Corrigendum: A Survey of Consumer Perceptions of Plant-Based and Clean Meat in the USA, India, and China. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 2020, 4, 1 .
AMA StyleChristopher Bryant, Keri Szejda, Nishant Parekh, Varun Deshpande, Brian Tse. Corrigendum: A Survey of Consumer Perceptions of Plant-Based and Clean Meat in the USA, India, and China. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems. 2020; 4 ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher Bryant; Keri Szejda; Nishant Parekh; Varun Deshpande; Brian Tse. 2020. "Corrigendum: A Survey of Consumer Perceptions of Plant-Based and Clean Meat in the USA, India, and China." Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 4, no. : 1.
Animal agriculture is implicated as a major cause of greenhouse gas emissions, animal suffering and public health problems. This survey asked 1000 UK meat-eaters about their beliefs about vegetarian and vegan diets, and their intended consumption of meat and animal products one month in the future. One in six intended to reduce their meat consumption in the next month, and 14% intended to reduce their consumption of animal products. The majority agreed that vegetarian and vegan diets are ethical, good for the environment and healthy. The majority also agreed that both vegetarianism and veganism were socially acceptable. However, there were three consistent negative beliefs about vegetarian and vegan diets: that they are difficult, that they are not enjoyable and that they are expensive. Moreover, perceptions of vegan diets were significantly more negative than perceptions of vegetarian diets on most aspects. Significant differences in perceptions of each diet were observed between genders and by age. It is argued that most meat-eaters agree with the ethical and environmental arguments in favour of vegetarianism/veganism but do not follow these diets because of practical reasons relating to taste, price and convenience. New alternatives to animal products are discussed as a possible way to address these practical barriers. Finally, the case is made for more research on developing high-quality, low-cost and widely available animal product alternatives.
Christopher J. Bryant. We Can’t Keep Meating Like This: Attitudes towards Vegetarian and Vegan Diets in the United Kingdom. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6844 .
AMA StyleChristopher J. Bryant. We Can’t Keep Meating Like This: Attitudes towards Vegetarian and Vegan Diets in the United Kingdom. Sustainability. 2019; 11 (23):6844.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher J. Bryant. 2019. "We Can’t Keep Meating Like This: Attitudes towards Vegetarian and Vegan Diets in the United Kingdom." Sustainability 11, no. 23: 6844.
Cultured meat can be produced from growing animal cells in-vitro rather than as part of a living animal. This technology has the potential to address several of the major ethical, environmental, and public health concerns associated with conventional meat production. However, research has highlighted some consumer uncertainty regarding the concept. Although several studies have examined the media coverage of this new food technology, research linking different frames to differences in consumer attitudes is lacking. In an experimental study, we expose U.S. adults (n = 480) to one of three different frames on cultured meat: “societal benefits,” “high tech,” and “same meat.” We demonstrate that those who encounter cultured meat through the “high tech” frame have significantly more negative attitudes toward the concept, and are significantly less likely to consume it. Worryingly, this has been a very dominant frame in early media coverage of cultured meat. Whilst this is arguably inevitable, since its technologically advanced nature is what makes it newsworthy, we argue that this high tech framing may be causing consumers to develop more negative attitudes toward cultured meat than they otherwise might. Implications for producers and researchers are discussed.
Christopher Bryant; Courtney Dillard. The Impact of Framing on Acceptance of Cultured Meat. Frontiers in Nutrition 2019, 6, 103 .
AMA StyleChristopher Bryant, Courtney Dillard. The Impact of Framing on Acceptance of Cultured Meat. Frontiers in Nutrition. 2019; 6 ():103.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher Bryant; Courtney Dillard. 2019. "The Impact of Framing on Acceptance of Cultured Meat." Frontiers in Nutrition 6, no. : 103.
Clean meat (grown from animal cells rather than rearing animals) has the potential to address many concerns associated with meat production. However, research suggests that the perceived unnaturalness of clean meat could be a barrier to consumer acceptance. This study investigated the efficacy of different messages designed to address consumers' concerns about clean meat naturalness. In an experimental design, participants read one of four messages: clean meat is natural, conventional meat is unnatural, naturalness is not important, or highlighting benefits of clean meat without addressing naturalness. The results indicated that arguing that conventional meat is unnatural resulted in a significant increase in some measures of acceptance compared to other messages. Arguing that clean meat is natural and challenging the appeal to nature were less persuasive, and challenging the appeal to nature resulted in some measures of acceptance being lower than not addressing naturalness. We discuss these results in the context of existing naturalness research and give recommendations for further research.
Christopher J. Bryant; Joanna E. Anderson; Kathryn Asher; Che Green; Kristopher Gasteratos. Strategies for overcoming aversion to unnaturalness: The case of clean meat. Meat Science 2019, 154, 37 -45.
AMA StyleChristopher J. Bryant, Joanna E. Anderson, Kathryn Asher, Che Green, Kristopher Gasteratos. Strategies for overcoming aversion to unnaturalness: The case of clean meat. Meat Science. 2019; 154 ():37-45.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher J. Bryant; Joanna E. Anderson; Kathryn Asher; Che Green; Kristopher Gasteratos. 2019. "Strategies for overcoming aversion to unnaturalness: The case of clean meat." Meat Science 154, no. : 37-45.
Ology could enable consumers to circumvent the ethical and environmental issues associated with meat-eating. However, consumer acceptance of IVM is uncertain, and is partly dependent on how the product is framed. This study investigated the effect of different names for IVM on measures of consumer acceptance. Participants (N = 185) were allocated to one of four conditions in an experimental design in which the product name was manipulated to be ‘clean meat’, ‘cultured meat’, ‘animal free meat’, or ‘lab grown meat’. Participants gave word associations and measures of their attitudes and behavioral intentions towards the product. The results indicated that those in the ‘clean meat’ and ‘animal free meat’ conditions had significantly more positive attitudes towards IVM than those in the ‘lab grown meat’ condition, and those in the ‘clean meat’ condition had significantly more positive behavioural intentions towards IVM compared to those in the ‘lab grown meat’ condition. Mediation analyses indicated that the valence of associations accounted for a significant amount of the observed differences, suggesting that anchoring can explain these differences. We discuss these results in the context of social representations theory and give recommendations for future research.
Christopher J. Bryant; Julie Barnett. What's in a name? Consumer perceptions of in vitro meat under different names. Appetite 2019, 137, 104 -113.
AMA StyleChristopher J. Bryant, Julie Barnett. What's in a name? Consumer perceptions of in vitro meat under different names. Appetite. 2019; 137 ():104-113.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher J. Bryant; Julie Barnett. 2019. "What's in a name? Consumer perceptions of in vitro meat under different names." Appetite 137, no. : 104-113.
Recent years have seen increasing interest in research on consumer acceptance of clean meat. Whilst some consumers are enthusiastic about the prospect of reducing the health risks, environmental harms, and animal welfare implications associated with conventional meat production, others have concerns about the product's taste, price, safety, and naturalness. Some evidence suggests that acceptance of clean meat will vary substantially across cultures, though there is currently a lack of quantitative research in Asia and country comparisons on this topic. Both are likely to be important areas given the forecasted increase in meat consumption in developing countries. Participants (n = 3.030) were recruited through the research panel CINT to take an online questionnaire about clean meat and plant-based meat. The participants were representative of China, India, and the U.S. in terms of age and gender, though participants in India and China were disproportionately urban, high income, and well-educated. As well as clean meat, participants were asked about plant-based meat, a conceptually similar product with similar potential to displace demand for conventional meat. They also answered the Meat Attachment Questionnaire and the Food Neophobia Scale. We compared these variables between countries, and used regression models to identify which demographic and attitudinal factors predicted purchase intent toward both products. We found significantly higher acceptance of clean and plant-based meat in India and China compared to the USA. We also found significantly higher food neophobia and significantly lower meat attachment in India compared to China and the USA. We identified several demographic patterns of clean and plant-based meat acceptance as well as which beliefs were important predictors of acceptance within each country. In particular, higher familiarity predicted higher acceptance of plant-based and clean meat across all countries. We found high levels of acceptance of clean meat in the three most populous countries worldwide, and with even higher levels of acceptance in China and India compared to the USA. These results underline the importance of clean meat producers exploring new markets for their products, especially as meat consumption in developing countries continues to rise.
Christopher Bryant; Keri Szejda; Nishant Parekh; Varun Deshpande; Brian Tse. A Survey of Consumer Perceptions of Plant-Based and Clean Meat in the USA, India, and China. Frontiers in Sustainability 2019, 3, 1 .
AMA StyleChristopher Bryant, Keri Szejda, Nishant Parekh, Varun Deshpande, Brian Tse. A Survey of Consumer Perceptions of Plant-Based and Clean Meat in the USA, India, and China. Frontiers in Sustainability. 2019; 3 ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher Bryant; Keri Szejda; Nishant Parekh; Varun Deshpande; Brian Tse. 2019. "A Survey of Consumer Perceptions of Plant-Based and Clean Meat in the USA, India, and China." Frontiers in Sustainability 3, no. : 1.
Cultured meat grown in-vitro from animal cells is being developed as a way of addressing many of the ethical and environmental concerns associated with conventional meat production. As commercialisation of this technology appears increasingly feasible, there is growing interest in the research on consumer acceptance of cultured meat. We present a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature, and synthesize and analyse the findings of 14 empirical studies. We highlight demographic variations in consumer acceptance, factors influencing acceptance, common consumer objections, perceived benefits, and areas of uncertainty. We conclude by evaluating the most important objections and benefits to consumers, as well as highlighting areas for future research.
Christopher Bryant; Julie Barnett. Consumer acceptance of cultured meat: A systematic review. Meat Science 2018, 143, 8 -17.
AMA StyleChristopher Bryant, Julie Barnett. Consumer acceptance of cultured meat: A systematic review. Meat Science. 2018; 143 ():8-17.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher Bryant; Julie Barnett. 2018. "Consumer acceptance of cultured meat: A systematic review." Meat Science 143, no. : 8-17.
Chk1 inhibitors are currently in clinical trials as putative potentiators of cytotoxic chemotherapy drugs. Chk1 inhibitors may exhibit single agent anti-tumor activity in cancers with underlying DNA repair, DNA damage response or DNA replication defects. Here we describe the cellular effects of the pharmacological inhibition of the checkpoint kinase Chk1 by the novel inhibitor V158411 in triple-negative breast cancer and ovarian cancer. Cytotoxicity, the effect on DNA damage response and cell cycle along with the ability to potentiate gemcitabine and cisplatin cytotoxicity in cultured cells was investigated. Western blotting of proteins involved in DNA repair, checkpoint activation, cell cycle and apoptosis was used to identify potential predictive biomarkers of Chk1 inhibitor sensitivity. The Chk1 inhibitors V158411, PF-477736 and AZD7762 potently inhibited the proliferation of triple-negative breast cancer cells as well as ovarian cancer cells, and these cell lines were sensitive compared to ER positive breast and other solid cancer cells lines. Inhibition of Chk1 in these sensitive cell lines induced DNA damage and caspase-3/7 dependent apoptosis. Western blot profiling identified pChk1 (S296) as a predictive biomarker of Chk1 inhibitor sensitivity in ovarian and triple-negative breast cancer and pH2AX (S139) in luminal breast cancer. This finding suggests that Chk1 inhibitors either as single agents or in combination chemotherapy represents a viable therapeutic option for the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer. pChk1 (S296) tumor expression levels could serve as a useful biomarker to stratify patients who might benefit from Chk1 inhibitor therapy.
Christopher Bryant; Rebecca Rawlinson; Andrew J Massey. Chk1 Inhibition as a novel therapeutic strategy for treating triple-negative breast and ovarian cancers. BMC Cancer 2014, 14, 1 -14.
AMA StyleChristopher Bryant, Rebecca Rawlinson, Andrew J Massey. Chk1 Inhibition as a novel therapeutic strategy for treating triple-negative breast and ovarian cancers. BMC Cancer. 2014; 14 (1):1-14.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher Bryant; Rebecca Rawlinson; Andrew J Massey. 2014. "Chk1 Inhibition as a novel therapeutic strategy for treating triple-negative breast and ovarian cancers." BMC Cancer 14, no. 1: 1-14.
Chk1 forms a core component of the DNA damage response and small molecule inhibitors are currently being investigated in the clinic as cytotoxic chemotherapy potentiators. Recent evidence suggests that Chk1 inhibitors may demonstrate significant single agent activity in tumors with specific DNA repair defects, a constitutively activated DNA damage response or oncogene induced replicative stress. Growth inhibition induced by the small molecule Chk1 inhibitor V158411 was assessed in a panel of human leukemia and lymphoma cell lines and compared to cancer cell lines derived from solid tumors. The effects on cell cycle and DNA damage response markers were further evaluated. Leukemia and lymphoma cell lines were identified as particularly sensitive to the Chk1 inhibitor V158411 (mean GI50 0.17 μM) compared to colon (2.8 μM) or lung (6.9 μM) cancer cell lines. Chk1 inhibition by V158411 in the leukemia and lymphoma cell lines induced DNA fragmentation and cell death that was both caspase dependent and independent, and prevented cells undergoing mitosis. An analysis of in vitro pharmacodynamic markers identified a dose dependent decrease in Chk1 and cyclin B1 protein levels and Cdc2 Thr15 phosphorylation along with a concomitant increase in H2AX phosphorylation at Ser139 following V158411 treatment. These data support the further evaluation of Chk1 inhibitors in hematopoietic cancers as single agents as well as in combination with standard of care cytotoxic drugs.
Christopher Bryant; Kirsten Scriven; Andrew J Massey. Inhibition of the checkpoint kinase Chk1 induces DNA damage and cell death in human Leukemia and Lymphoma cells. Molecular Cancer 2014, 13, 147 -147.
AMA StyleChristopher Bryant, Kirsten Scriven, Andrew J Massey. Inhibition of the checkpoint kinase Chk1 induces DNA damage and cell death in human Leukemia and Lymphoma cells. Molecular Cancer. 2014; 13 (1):147-147.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher Bryant; Kirsten Scriven; Andrew J Massey. 2014. "Inhibition of the checkpoint kinase Chk1 induces DNA damage and cell death in human Leukemia and Lymphoma cells." Molecular Cancer 13, no. 1: 147-147.
Research antibodies are used by thousands of scientists working in diverse disciplines, but it is common to hear concerns about antibody quality. This means that researchers need to carefully choose the antibodies they use to avoid wasting time and money. A well accepted way of selecting a research antibody is to identify one which has been used previously, where the associated data has been peer-reviewed and the results published. CiteAb is a searchable database which ranks antibodies by the number of times they have been cited. This allows researchers to easily find antibodies that have been used in peer-reviewed publications and the accompanying citations are listed, so users can check the data contained within the publications. This makes CiteAb a useful resource for identifying antibodies for experiments and also for finding information to demonstrate antibody validation. The database currently contains 1,400,000 antibodies which are from 90 suppliers, including 87 commercial companies and 3 academic resources. Associated with these antibodies are 140,000 publications which provide 306,000 antibody citations. In addition to searching, users can also browse through the antibodies and add their own publications to the CiteAb database. CiteAb provides a new way for researchers to find research antibodies that have been used successfully in peer-reviewed publications. It aims to assist these researchers and will hopefully help promote progress in many areas of life science research.
Matthew A Helsby; Paul M Leader; Joe R Fenn; Tulay Gulsen; Chris Bryant; Gail Doughton; Ben Sharpe; Paul Whitley; Christopher J Caunt; Katrina James; Adam D Pope; Dave H Kelly; Andrew D Chalmers. CiteAb: a searchable antibody database that ranks antibodies by the number of times they have been cited. BMC Cell Biology 2014, 15, 6 -6.
AMA StyleMatthew A Helsby, Paul M Leader, Joe R Fenn, Tulay Gulsen, Chris Bryant, Gail Doughton, Ben Sharpe, Paul Whitley, Christopher J Caunt, Katrina James, Adam D Pope, Dave H Kelly, Andrew D Chalmers. CiteAb: a searchable antibody database that ranks antibodies by the number of times they have been cited. BMC Cell Biology. 2014; 15 (1):6-6.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMatthew A Helsby; Paul M Leader; Joe R Fenn; Tulay Gulsen; Chris Bryant; Gail Doughton; Ben Sharpe; Paul Whitley; Christopher J Caunt; Katrina James; Adam D Pope; Dave H Kelly; Andrew D Chalmers. 2014. "CiteAb: a searchable antibody database that ranks antibodies by the number of times they have been cited." BMC Cell Biology 15, no. 1: 6-6.