Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23678952›Full record

ReviewTissue engineering. Part B, Reviews2014

In situ tissue regeneration: chemoattractants for endogenous stem cell recruitment.

Wendy S Vanden Berg-Foels

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

69 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 139 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Roles of Chemokines in Intervertebral Disk Degeneration.Current pain and headache reports · 2024
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Wendy S Vanden Berg-Foels1 Department of Bioengineering, Clemson University , Clemson, South Carolina.
Medical University of South Carolina · US

Funding

T-COHR: Training in Craniofacial and Oral Health ResearchT32DE017551 · NIDCR · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI YAO, HAI · 2006 to 2025
$10.3M
Mandibular Cartilage Regeneration In Situ by Endogenous Stem Cell RecruitmentR00DE023123 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT STORRS · PI VANDEN BERG-FOELS, WENDY S. · 2015 to 2017
$736k
Mandibular Cartilage Regeneration In Situ by Endogenous Stem Cell RecruitmentK99DE023123 · NIDCR · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI VANDEN BERG-FOELS, WENDY S. · 2012 to 2013
$178k
NIDCR NIH HHS K99 DE023123NIDCR NIH HHS K99DE023123NIDCR NIH HHS R00 DE023123NIDCR NIH HHS T32DE017551
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tissue engineering uses cells, signaling molecules, and/or biomaterials to regenerate injured or diseased tissues. Ex vivo expanded mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) have long been a cornerstone of regeneration therapies; however, drawbacks that include altered signaling responses and reduced homing capacity have prompted investigation of regeneration based on endogenous MSC recruitment. Recent successful proof-of-concept studies have further motivated endogenous MSC recruitment-based approaches. Stem cell migration is required for morphogenesis and organogenesis during development and for tissue maintenance and injury repair in adults. A biomimetic approach to in situ tissue regeneration by endogenous MSC requires the orchestration of three main stages: MSC recruitment, MSC differentiation, and neotissue maturation. The first stage must result in recruitment of a sufficient number of MSC, capable of effecting regeneration, to the injured or diseased tissue. One of the challenges for engineering endogenous MSC recruitment is the selection of effective chemoattractant(s). The objective of this review is to synthesize and evaluate evidence of recruitment efficacy by reported chemoattractants, including growth factors, chemokines, and other more recently appreciated MSC chemoattractants. The influence of MSC tissue sources, cell culture methods, and the in vitro and in vivo environments is discussed. This growing body of knowledge will serve as a basis for the rational design of regenerative therapies based on endogenous MSC recruitment. Successful endogenous MSC recruitment is the first step of successful tissue regeneration.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell DifferentiationCell MovementCells, CulturedChemokinesChemotactic FactorsHumansIntercellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsMesenchymal Stem CellsRegenerationStem CellsTissue EngineeringWound HealingChemokinesChemotactic FactorsIntercellular Signaling Peptides and Proteins

Identifiers

PMID23678952
PMCPMC3922297
OpenAlexW335388451

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.