ReviewJournal of biosciences2012
Mammary gland stem cells: more puzzles than explanations.
Review in Journal of biosciences, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- GOS enhances BDNF-mediated mammary gland development in pubertal mice via the gut-brain axis.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2024Article
- Article
- Unraveling Heterogeneity in Epithelial Cell Fates of the Mammary Gland and Breast Cancer.Cancers · 2019Review
- Mammary stem cells: expansion and animal productivity.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2014Review
- Leptin receptor maintains cancer stem-like properties in triple negative breast cancer cells.Endocrine-related cancer · 2013Article
- Critical research gaps and translational priorities for the successful prevention and treatment of breast cancer.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2013Review
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
Mammary gland stem cells (MaSC) have not been identified in spite of extensive research spanning over several decades. This has been primarily due to the complexity of mammary gland structure and its development, cell heterogeneity in the mammary gland and the insufficient knowledge about MaSC markers. At present, Lin (-) CD29 (i) CD49f (i) CD24 (+/mod) Sca- 1 (-) cells of the mammary gland have been reported to be enriched with MaSCs. We suggest that the inclusion of stem cell markers like Oct4, Sox2, Nanog and the mammary gland differentiation marker BRCA-1 may further narrow down the search for MaSCs. In addition, we have discussed some of the other unresolved puzzles on the mammary gland stem cells, such as their similarities and/or differences with mammary cancer stem cells, use of milk as source of mammary stem cells and the possibility of in vitro differentiation of embryonic stem (ES) cells into functional mammary gland structures in this review. Nevertheless, it is the lack of identity for a MaSC that is curtailing the advances in some of the above and other related areas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22581339What 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.