Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21946010›Full record

ReviewNeuroscience2011

Migration and fate of therapeutic stem cells in different brain disease models.

B J Carney, K Shah

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuroscience, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Stem cell-based therapy for human diseases.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2022
    Review
  4. Parkinson's disease treatment: past, present, and future.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2020
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Magnetic resonance imaging of transplanted stem cell fate in stroke.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2014
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

B J CarneyMolecular Neurotherapy and Imaging Laboratory, Department of Radiology and Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
K Shah

Funding

Stem cell mediated targeting of tumor cells and associated vasculature in gliomasR01NS071197 · NINDS · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI SHAH, KHALID A · 2011 to 2014
$1.5M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS071197
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stem cells have a number of properties, which make them excellent candidates for the treatment of various neurologic disorders, the most important of which being their ability to migrate to and differentiate predictably at sites of pathology in the brain. The disease-directed migration and well-characterized differentiation patterns of stem cells may eventually provide a powerful tool for the treatment of both localized and diffuse disease processes within the human brain. A thorough understanding of the molecular mechanisms governing their migratory properties and their choice between different differentiation programs is essential if these cells are to be used therapeutically in humans. This review focuses on summarizing the migration and differentiation of therapeutic neural and mesenchymal stem cells in different disease models in the brain and also discusses the promise of these cells to eventually treat various forms of neurologic disease.

Indexed as

AnimalsBrain DiseasesCell DifferentiationCell MovementDisease Models, AnimalMesenchymal Stem CellsNeural Stem CellsStem Cell Transplantation

Identifiers

PMID21946010
PMCPMC3589128

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.