ReviewStem cell reviews2006
The status of human nuclear transfer.
Review 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 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Induced pluripotent stem cells: advances to applications.Stem cells and cloning : advances and applications · 2010Article
- Stem cell platforms for regenerative medicine.Clinical and translational science · 2009Article
- Modelling germ cell development in vitro.Molecular human reproduction · 2008Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human therapeutic cloning is a recently emerged application of somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), which is currently being performed to produce patient-specific stem cell lines for future stem cell therapies. The advantages in producing human nuclear transfer (NT) embryos to derive NT stem cell lines are that these can be tailor-made (i.e., are autologous in nature) for the patient and may overcome the need to administer life-long immunosuppression following stem cell transplantation. Although the rationale for using NT embryos is not for reproductive purposes, human NT remains clouded in ethical, moral, and religious controversies. The recent retraction of high-impact factor publications in the field of human NT from a research group in South Korea has placed stem cell research in a delicate situation. These heavily publicized issues may hinder the progress of this research and may threaten to bring current research to a complete halt. This review outlines the recent status of human NT, its continuing progress and the difficulties the field faces. Of most concern are the ethical issues, which surround obtaining human oocytes for research. Recent evidence suggests that failed-to-fertilize oocytes are poor sources for human SCNT, but obtaining fresh, viable oocytes may be even more problematic. The current status of human SCNT is outlined in this review with particular reference made to, lessons learnt from animal research, the oocyte dilemma and optimization of human NT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.