Loading…

Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields Have No Effect on the In Vivo Proliferation of the 9L Brain Tumor

The intracranial 9L tumor model was used to determine if exposure to a radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic field similar to those used in cellular telephone has any effects on the growth of a central nervous system tumor. Fischer 344 rats implanted with different numbers of 9L gliosarcoma cells were...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Radiation research 1999-12, Vol.152 (6), p.665-671
Main Authors: Higashikubo, Ryuji, Culbreth, Victoria O., Spitz, Douglas R., LaRegina, Marie C., Pickard, William F., Straube, William L., Moros, Eduardo G., Joseph L. Roti Roti
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The intracranial 9L tumor model was used to determine if exposure to a radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic field similar to those used in cellular telephone has any effects on the growth of a central nervous system tumor. Fischer 344 rats implanted with different numbers of 9L gliosarcoma cells were exposed to 835.62 MHz frequency-modulated continuous wave (FMCW) or 847.74 MHz code division multiple access (CDMA) RF field with nominal slot-average specific absorption rates in the brain of 0.75 ± 0.25 W/kg. The animals were exposed to the RF field for 4 h a day, 5 days a week starting 4 weeks prior to and up to 150 days after the implantation of tumor cells. Among sham-exposed animals injected with 2 to 10 viable cells (group 1), the median survival was 70 days, with 27% of the animals surviving at 150 days. The median survival length and final survival fraction for animals injected with 11 to 36 viable cells (group 2) were 52 days and 14%, respectively, while the values for those injected with 37 to 100 cells (group 3) were 45 days and 0%. The animals exposed to CDMA or FMCW had similar survival parameters, and the statistical comparison of the survival curves for each of the groups 1, 2 and 3 showed no significant differences compared to sham-exposed controls.
ISSN:0033-7587
1938-5404
DOI:10.2307/3580262