ReviewStem cells translational medicine2014
Concise review: animal substance-free human embryonic stem cells aiming at clinical applications.
Review in Stem cells translational medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-termAdipocyte · 2022Article
- Current treatments after spinal cord injury: Cell engineering, tissue engineering, and combined therapies.Smart medicine · 2022Review
- Serum-free media for the growth of primary bovine myoblasts.Cytotechnology · 2020Article
- Probing the mechanism for hydrogel-based stasis induction in human pluripotent stem cells: is the chemical functionality of the hydrogel important?Chemical science · 2019Article
- Developing defined substrates for stem cell culture and differentiation.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2018Review
- Laminin 521 Stabilizes the Pluripotency Expression Pattern of Human Embryonic Stem Cells Initially Derived on Feeder Cells.Stem cells international · 2018Article
- Techniques of Human Embryonic Stem Cell and Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Derivation.Archivum immunologiae et therapiae experimentalis · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human embryonic stem cells have been considered the gold standard as a cell source for regenerative medicine since they were first cultured in 1998. They are pluripotent and can form principally all the cells types in the body. They are obtained from supernumerary human in vitro fertilization embryos that cannot be used for infertility treatment. Following studies on factors regulating pluripotency and differentiation, we now have techniques to establish and effectively expand these cells in animal substance-free conditions, even from single cells biopsied from eight-cell stage embryos in chemically defined feeder-free cultures. The genetic stability and absence of tumorigenic mutations can be determined. There are satisfactory animal tests for functionality and safety. The first clinical trials are ongoing for two indications: age-related macular degeneration and spinal cord injury.
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.