Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17848713›Full record

ArticleStem cell reviews2006

Human therapeutic cloning (NTSC): applying research from mammalian reproductive cloning.

Andrew J French, Samuel H Wood, Alan O Trounson

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Stem cell reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

3 authors.

Andrew J FrenchStemagen Corporation, La Jolla, California, 92037, USA. afrench@stemagen.com
Samuel H Wood
Alan O Trounson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human therapeutic cloning or nuclear transfer stem cells (NTSC) to produce patient-specific stem cells, holds considerable promise in the field of regenerative medicine. The recent withdrawal of the only scientific publications claiming the successful generation of NTSC lines afford an opportunity to review the available research in mammalian reproductive somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) with the goal of progressing human NTSC. The process of SCNT is prone to epigenetic abnormalities that contribute to very low success rates. Although there are high mortality rates in some species of cloned animals, most surviving clones have been shown to have normal phenotypic and physiological characteristics and to produce healthy offspring. This technology has been applied to an increasing number of mammals for utility in research, agriculture, conservation, and biomedicine. In contrast, attempts at SCNT to produce human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) have been disappointing. Only one group has published reliable evidence of success in deriving a cloned human blastocyst, using an undifferentiated hESC donor cell, and it failed to develop into a hESC line. When optimal conditions are present, it appears that in vitro development of cloned and parthenogenetic embryos, both of which may be utilized to produce hESCs, may be similar to in vitro fertilized embryos. The derivation of ESC lines from cloned embryos is substantially more efficient than the production of viable offspring. This review summarizes developments in mammalian reproductive cloning, cell-to-cell fusion alternatives, and strategies for oocyte procurement that may provide important clues facilitating progress in human therapeutic cloning leading to the successful application of cell-based therapies utilizing autologous hESC lines.

Indexed as

Cloning, OrganismNuclear Transfer TechniquesAnimalsCell DifferentiationCellular ReprogrammingEmbryo, MammalianEmbryonic Stem CellsHumansHybrid CellsOocytes

Identifiers

PMID17848713

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.