ArticleBioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology2009
Characterisation of normal and cancer stem cells: one experimental paradigm for two kinds of stem cells.
Article in BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Purification of Kudoa septempunctata myxospores by using trypsin and fluorescence activated cell sorting.Parasites, hosts and diseases · 2026Article
- In vitro expansion of human glioblastoma cells at non-physiological oxygen tension irreversibly alters subsequent in vivo aggressiveness and AC133 expression.International journal of oncology · 2012Article
- Curcumin inhibits the side population (SP) phenotype of the rat C6 glioma cell line: towards targeting of cancer stem cells with phytochemicals.Cancer letters · 2010Article
- Establishment and characterization of multi-drug resistant, prostate carcinoma-initiating stem-like cells from human prostate cancer cell lines 22RV1.Molecular and cellular biochemistry · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The characterisation of normal stem cells and cancer stem cells uses the same paradigm. These cells are isolated by a fluorescence-activated cell sorting step and their stemness is assayed following implantation into animals. However, differences exist between these two kinds of stem cells. Therefore, the translation of the experimental procedures used for normal stem cell isolation into the research field of cancer stem cells is a potential source of artefacts. In addition, normal stem cell therapy has the objective of regenerating a tissue, while cancer stem cell-centred therapy seeks the destruction of the cancer tissue. Taking these differences into account is critical for anticipating problems that might arise in cancer stem cell-centred therapy and for upgrading the cancer stem cell paradigm accordingly.
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.