Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24625139›Full record

ArticleStem cells and development2014

Comparative analysis of mouse-induced pluripotent stem cells and mesenchymal stem cells during osteogenic differentiation in vitro.

Hiroshi Egusa, Hiroki Kayashima, Jiro Miura, Shinya Uraguchi, Fangfang Wang, Hiroko Okawa, Jun-Ichi Sasaki, Makio Saeki, Takuya Matsumoto, Hirofumi Yatani

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Stem cells and development, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Large three-dimensional cell constructs for tissue engineering.Science and technology of advanced materials · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Hiroshi Egusa1 Division of Oromaxillofacial Regeneration, Department of Fixed Prosthodontics, Osaka University Graduate School of Dentistry , Suita, Osaka, Japan .
Hiroki Kayashima
Jiro Miura
Shinya Uraguchi
Fangfang Wang
Hiroko Okawa
Jun-Ichi Sasaki
Makio Saeki
Takuya Matsumoto
Hirofumi Yatani
The University of Osaka · JPNiigata University · JPOkayama University · JPOsaka University Hospital · JPTohoku University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) can differentiate into mineralizing cells and are, therefore, expected to be useful for bone regenerative medicine; however, the characteristics of iPSC-derived osteogenic cells remain unclear. Here, we provide a direct in vitro comparison of the osteogenic differentiation process in mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and iPSCs from adult C57BL/6J mice. After 30 days of culture in osteogenic medium, both MSCs and iPSCs produced robustly mineralized bone nodules that contained abundant calcium phosphate with hydroxyapatite crystal formation. Mineral deposition was significantly higher in iPSC cultures than in MSC cultures. Scanning electron microscopy revealed budding matrix vesicles in early osteogenic iPSCs; subsequently, the vesicles propagated to exhibit robust mineralization without rich fibrous structures. Early osteogenic MSCs showed deposition of many matrix vesicles in abundant collagen fibrils that became solid mineralized structures. Both cell types demonstrated increased expression of osteogenic marker genes, such as runx2, osterix, dlx5, bone sialoprotein (BSP), and osteocalcin, during osteogenesis; however, real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction array analysis revealed that osteogenesis-related genes encoding mineralization-associated molecules, bone morphogenetic proteins, and extracellular matrix collagens were differentially expressed between iPSCs and MSCs. These data suggest that iPSCs are capable of differentiation into mature osteoblasts whose associated hydroxyapatite has a crystal structure similar to that of MSC-associated hydroxyapatite; however, the transcriptional differences between iPSCs and MSCs could result in differences in the mineral and matrix environments of the bone nodules. Determining the biological mechanisms underlying cell-specific differences in mineralization during in vitro iPSC osteogenesis may facilitate the development of clinically effective engineered bone.

Indexed as

Cell DifferentiationOsteogenesisAnimalsBiomarkersCalcification, PhysiologicExtracellular MatrixGene Expression RegulationInduced Pluripotent Stem CellsMaleMesenchymal Stem CellsMice, Inbred C57BLBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID24625139
PMCPMC4155416
OpenAlexW1969544384

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.