Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15378081›Full record

ReviewOncogene2004

Identification of hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells: strength and drawbacks of functional assays.

Laure Coulombel

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Oncogene, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Laure CoulombelINSERM U 421, Faculté de Médecine, 8 rue du général Sarrail, Créteil 94010, France. coulombel@im3.inserm.fr

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A major challenge in hematopoiesis is to conceive assays that could bring useful insights into experimental and clinical hematology. This means identifying separately the various classes of hematopoietic progenitors that are produced sequentially during the progression from stem cells to differentiated functional cells. Standardized short-term colony assays easily quantify lineage-committed myeloid precursors, but identification of primitive cells, which have both the ability to repopulate durably myeloid and lymphoid lineages and perhaps to self-renew, still depends on in vivo assays. Whatever the assay, two important requisites have to be solved: one is the definition of appropriate read-outs that will depend solely on the function of these cells, and the second is to evaluate precisely their numbers and proliferative potential in quantitative assays. When evaluating hematopoiesis, three parameters have to be taken into account: (1) the lack of reliable correlation between the phenotype of a given cell and its function. This is especially problematic in post-transplantation situations where cells from transplanted animals are analysed; (2) functionally heterogeneous cells are identified in a single assay; and (3) ontogeny-related changes in hematopoietic cell proliferation and self-renewal that, in human beings, hampers the exploration of adult stem cells. Nevertheless, years of progress in the manipulation of hematopoietic stem cells have recently resulted in the purification of a cell subset that repopulates irradiated recipients with absolute efficiency.

Indexed as

Cytological TechniquesAdultAnimalsBlood CellsBone Marrow CellsCell CountCell DifferentiationCells, CulturedColony-Forming Units AssayFetal BloodHematopoietic Stem CellsHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansLiverLymphocyte SubsetsMice

Identifiers

PMID15378081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.