ReviewNeuroscience bulletin2011
Induced pluripotent stem cells and neurodegenerative diseases.
Review in Neuroscience bulletin, 2011. 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, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current Perspectives regarding Stem Cell-Based Therapy for Alzheimer's Disease.Stem cells international · 2018Review
- Induced pluripotent stem cells and Parkinson's disease: modelling and treatment.Cell proliferation · 2016Review
- Stem cell therapy for Alzheimer's disease and related disorders: current status and future perspectives.Experimental & molecular medicine · 2015Review
- The 22q13.3 Deletion Syndrome (Phelan-McDermid Syndrome).Molecular syndromology · 2012Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neurodegenerative diseases, including Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, are characterized by idiopathic neuron loss in different regions of the central nervous system, which contributes to the relevant dysfunctions in the patients. The application of cell replacement therapy using human embryonic stem (hES) cells, though having attracted much attention, has been hampered by the intrinsic ethical problems. It has been demonstrated that adult somatic cells can be reprogrammed into the embryonic state, called induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells. It is soon realized that iPS cells may be an alternative source for cell replacement therapy, because it raises no ethical problems and using patient-specific iPS cells for autologous transplantation will not lead to immunological rejection. What's more, certain types of neurons derived from patient-specific iPS cells may display disease-relevant phenotypes. Thus, patient-specific iPS cells can provide a unique opportunity to directly investigate the pathological properties of relevant neural cells in individual patient, and to study the vulnerability of neural cells to pathogenic factors in vitro, which may help reveal the pathogenesis of many neurodegenerative diseases. In this review, the recent development in cellular treatment of neurodegenerative diseases using iPS cells was summarized, and the potential value of iPS cells in the modeling of neurodegenerative disease was discussed.
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.