ArticlePloS one2009
Direct in vivo cell lineage analysis in the retrorsine and 2AAF models of liver injury after genetic labeling in adult and newborn rats.
Article in PloS one, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- "Small Hepatocytes" in the Liver.Cells · 2023Review
- Distinct hepatocyte identities in liver homeostasis and regeneration.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2023Review
- Cell turnover in the repopulated rat liver: distinct lineages for hepatocytes and the biliary epithelium.Cell and tissue research · 2014Article
- Activin A induces growth arrest through a SMAD- dependent pathway in hepatic progenitor cells.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2014Article
- Polyploidization without mitosis improves in vivo liver transduction with lentiviral vectors.Human gene therapy · 2013Article
- Facultative stem cells in liver and pancreas: fact and fancy.Developmental dynamics : an official publication of the American Association of Anatomists · 2011Review
- Management of Liver Failure: From Transplantation to Cell-Based Therapy.Cell medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUNDS AND
aimsWhen hepatocyte proliferation is impaired, liver regeneration proceeds from the division of non parenchymal hepatocyte progenitors. Oval cells and Small Hepatocyte-like Progenitor Cells (SHPCs) represent the two most studied examples of such epithelial cells with putative stem cell capacity. In the present study we wished to compare the origin of SHPCs proliferating after retrorsine administration to the one of oval cells observed after 2-Acetyl-Amino fluorene (2-AAF) treatment. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsWe used retroviral-mediated nlslacZ genetic labeling of dividing cells to study the fate of cells in the liver. Labeling was performed either in adult rats before treatment or in newborn animals. Labeled cells were identified and characterised by immunohistochemistry. In adult-labeled animals, labeling was restricted to mature hepatocytes. Retrorsine treatment did not modify the overall number of labeled cells in the liver whereas after 2-AAF administration unlabeled oval cells were recorded and the total number of labeled cells decreased significantly. When labeling was performed in newborn rats, results after retrorsine administration were identical to those obtained in adult-labeled rats. In contrast, in the 2-AAF regimen numerous labeled oval cells were present and were able to generate new labeled hepatocytes. Furthermore, we also observed labeled biliary tracts in 2-AAF treated rats.
conclusionsOur results strongly suggest that SHPCs are derived from hepatocytes and we confirm that SHPCs and oval cells do not share the same origin. We also show that hepatic progenitors are labeled in newborn rats suggesting future directions for in vivo lineage studies.
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.