ReviewTransactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association2006
Cardiac stem cells and progenitors: developmental biology and therapeutic challenges.
Review in Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association, 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Focus on Extracellular Vesicles: Therapeutic Potential of Stem Cell-Derived Extracellular Vesicles.International journal of molecular sciences · 2016Review
- Whole-organ tissue engineering: decellularization and recellularization of three-dimensional matrix scaffolds.Annual review of biomedical engineering · 2011Review
- Stem Cell Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Pot of Gold or Pandora's Box.Stem cells international · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Discovery of embryonic and adult stem cells holds great promise for the treatment of cardiovascular disease. Embryonic stem (ES) cells differentiate into cardiac myocytes as well as multiple other cell lineages in vitro and when transplanted into the heart. However, their clinical application is limited by their pleuripotent nature, capacity to form teratomas and ethical concerns. Several groups have reported that bone marrow-derived cells differentiate into cardiac myocytes, though these findings remain controversial requiring further examination. Nevertheless, injection of bone marrow-derived cells in the setting of experimental models of myocardial infarction has demonstrated functional benefit. Similarly, small phase I/II clinical trials of bone marrow derived mononuclear cell infusions in the setting of acute myocardial infarction have generally demonstrated short term functional benefit. Most recently, several distinct populations of resident stem cells have been identified in the heart. Further elucidation of cardiovascular stem cell biology is a crucial first step in translating the promise of cardiac stem cells and progenitors into the clinical reality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18528477PMC1500935W41513815What 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.