Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21985539›Full record

ArticleExpert review of cardiovascular therapy2011

Induced pluripotent stem cells: progress towards a biomedical application.

Lucio Barile, Claudia Altomare, Antonio Zaza

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Expert review of cardiovascular therapy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Lucio BarileDipartimento di Biotecnologie e Bioscienze, Università degli Studi Milano-Bicocca, Piazza della Scienza 2, 20126 Milano, Italy.
Claudia Altomare
Antonio Zaza

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Some 5 years ago, Takahashi and Yamanaka first obtained induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) by genetically 'reprogramming' adult somatic cells (fibroblasts). This breakthrough opened a new frontier in regenerative medicine, in which iPSCs might effectively replace embryonic stem cells (ESCs), with the additional advantage of permitting autologous transplant. Unfortunately, the risk of aberrant reprogramming and of the complications related to the use of transgenes in the process still hinders iPSC clinical application. Nevertheless, differentiation of iPSCs derived from patients may already provide a formidable platform for the in vitro analysis of human disease mechanisms and their modulation by drugs. Such an approach has already been validated by the finding that iPSCs obtained from patients with a specific genetic syndrome can be differentiated into cardiomyocytes retaining the gene abnormality and recapitulating, at the cell level, the syndrome functional phenotype. Unlike the use of iPSCs in regenerative therapy, their development as disease models is unencumbered by safety constraints. Whatever the intended use, the availability of reliable and reproducible methods for somatic cell reprogramming, iPSC expansion and differentiation is pivotal and remains a major challenge to date. The article by Burridge and coworkers describes a process encompassing all the phases in the preparation of precursor-derived cardiomyocytes, characterized by unprecedented efficiency and, most notably, applicable to different human precursors, including ESCs and iPSCs derived from multiple somatic cell types. Provided that the process will prove reproducible when applied by different laboratories, the contribution of Burridge and coworkers may represent a genuine leap in the development of precursor-derived technologies.

Identifiers

PMID21985539

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.