Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24724061›Full record

ReviewBlood research2014

Disease modeling and cell based therapy with iPSC: future therapeutic option with fast and safe application.

Changsung Kim

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Blood research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Applications of synthetic biology in medical and pharmaceutical fields.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Induced Pluripotency: A Powerful Tool for In Vitro Modeling.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Review
  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

1 author.

Changsung KimDepartment of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Sejong University, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) technology has shown us great hope to treat various human diseases which have been known as untreatable and further endows personalized medicine for future therapy without ethical issues and immunological rejection which embryonic stem cell (hES) treatment has faced. It has been agreed that iPSCs knowledge can be harnessed from disease modeling which mimics human pathological development rather than trials utilizing conventional rodent and cell lines. Now, we can routinely generate iPSC from patient specific cell sources, such as skin fibroblast, hair follicle cells, patient blood samples and even urine containing small amount of epithelial cells. iPSC has both similarity and dissimilarity to hES. iPSC is similar enough to regenerate tissue and even full organism as ES does, however what we want for therapeutic advantage is limited to regenerated tissue and lineage specific differentiation. Depending on the lineage and type of cells, both tissue memory containing (DNA rearrangement/epigenetics) and non-containing iPSC can be generated. This makes iPSC even better choice to perform disease modeling as well as cell based therapy. Tissue memory containing iPSC from mature leukocytes would be beneficial for curing cancer and infectious disease. In this review, the benefit of iPSC for translational approaches will be presented.

Indexed as

Blood disorderCell transplantiPSCPatient specific medicineStem cell

Identifiers

PMID24724061
PMCPMC3974965

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.