Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24577362›Full record

ArticleNature protocols2014

Chemical ablation of tumor-initiating human pluripotent stem cells.

Uri Ben-David, Nissim Benvenisty

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature protocols, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Optimizing Generation of Stem Cell-Derived Islet Cells.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2022
    Review
  6. The Tumorigenic Potential of Human Pluripotent Stem Cells.Stem cells translational medicine · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Cell-Based Therapeutic Approaches for Cystic Fibrosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Review
  11. Prevention of tumor risk associated with the reprogramming of human pluripotent stem cells.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2020
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The Nexus of Stem Cell-Derived Beta-Cells and Genome Engineering.The review of diabetic studies : RDS · 2017
    Review
  20. Article
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.

Uri Ben-DavidStem Cell Unit, Department of Genetics, Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel.
Nissim BenvenistyStem Cell Unit, Department of Genetics, Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The tumorigenicity of human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs) is widely acknowledged as a major obstacle that withholds their application in regenerative medicine. This protocol describes two efficient and robust ways to chemically eliminate the tumor-initiating hPSCs from monolayer culture. The protocol details how to maintain and differentiate hPSCs, how to apply chemical inhibitors to cultures of hPSCs and their differentiated progeny, and how to assess the purity of the resultant cell cultures using in vitro and in vivo assays. It also describes how to rescue the cytotoxic effect. The elimination and the rescue assay can be completed within 3-5 d, the in vitro assessment requires another day, and the in vivo assessment requires up to 12 additional weeks.

Indexed as

Ablation TechniquesCell SeparationClaudinsEnterotoxinsHumansNeoplastic Stem CellsPluripotent Stem CellsRegenerative MedicineStearoyl-CoA Desaturaseclaudin 6Claudinsenterotoxin, ClostridiumEnterotoxinsStearoyl-CoA Desaturase

Identifiers

PMID24577362

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.