ArticleStem cells and development2013
Defining the diversity of phenotypic respecification using multiple cell lines and reprogramming regimens.
Article in Stem cells and development, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Lead exposure disrupts global DNA methylation in human embryonic stem cells and alters their neuronal differentiation.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To better understand the basis of variation in cellular reprogramming, we performed experiments with two primary objectives: first, to determine the degree of difference, if any, in reprogramming efficiency among cells lines of a similar type after accounting for technical variables, and second, to compare the efficiency of conversion of multiple similar cell lines to two separate reprogramming regimens-induced neurons and induced skeletal muscle. Using two reprogramming regimens, it could be determined whether converted cells are likely derived from a distinct subpopulation that is generally susceptible to reprogramming or are derived from cells with an independent capacity for respecification to a given phenotype. Our results indicated that when technical components of the reprogramming regimen were accounted for, reprogramming efficiency was reproducible within a given primary fibroblast line but varied dramatically between lines. The disparity in reprogramming efficiency between lines was of sufficient magnitude to account for some discrepancies in published results. We also found that the efficiency of conversion to one phenotype was not predictive of reprogramming to the alternate phenotype, suggesting that the capacity for reprogramming does not arise from a specific subpopulation with a generally "weak grip" on cellular identity. Our findings suggest that parallel testing of multiple cell lines from several sources may be needed to accurately assess the efficiency of direct reprogramming procedures, and that testing a larger number of fibroblast lines--even lines with similar origins--is likely the most direct means of improving reprogramming efficiency.
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.