Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16796802›Full record

ReviewJournal of cellular and molecular medicine

Clinical and therapeutical implications of EPC biology in atherosclerosis.

N Werner, G Nickenig

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of cellular and molecular medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Endothelial progenitor cells: the promise of cell-based therapies for acute lung injury.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2013
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Endothelial progenitor cells in atherosclerosis.Frontiers in bioscience (Landmark edition) · 2012
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

2 authors.

N WernerMedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik II, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Germany. nwerner@uni-bonn.de
G Nickenig

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bone marrow-derived circulating endothelial progenitor cells have been successfully used to enhance angiogenesis after tissue ischemia. The role of endothelial progenitor cells in endothelial cell homeostasis and their putative role in atherogenesis have been recently investigated. Cardiovascular risk factors negatively influence endothelial progenitor cell number and function while vasculoprotection e.g. by statins, estrogens and physical activity may be partly mediated by progenitor cells. Endogenous mobilization or injection of ex-vivo generated endothelial progenitor cells is associated with an enhanced reendothelialization, an improvement of endothelial function and reduced atherosclerotic burden. In contrast, endothelial progenitor cells may promote plaque angiogenesis in animal models and may negatively influence plaque development and stability. However, in humans with coronary atherosclerotic disease, endothelial progenitor cells are a novel risk predictor for cardiovascular mortality and morbidity. In this review we focus on the role of circulating endothelial progenitor cells in endothelial cell repair mechanisms at the vascular wall and their potentially protective and therapeutic role in atherosclerotic disease.

Indexed as

BiologyStem CellsStem Cell TransplantationAtherosclerosisEndothelium, VascularHumansIschemiaModels, BiologicalNeovascularization, Physiologic

Identifiers

PMID16796802
PMCPMC3933124

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.