ArticleNature biotechnology2015
A comparison of non-integrating reprogramming methods.
Article in Nature biotechnology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 288 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
288 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- The transformative impact of stem cell core facilities in biomedical research.Stem cell reports · 2026Review
- Article
- Human thyroid organoids: tools for understanding thyroid diseases and development.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2026Review
- Modeling Inherited Disorders of Post-Lanosterol Cholesterol Biosynthesis: From Animal Models to Patient-Derived Stem Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Transcriptional landscape of direct reprogramming toward the hematopoietic lineage.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Efficient and reliable measles reprogramming platform for the generation of human iPSC.Molecular therapy. Advances · 2026Article
- Sendai virus-based human transcriptional gene delivery system fails to reprogram bovine mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) into induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC).Molecular biology reports · 2026Article
- Human iPSC-derived and conventional cancer models in precision oncology: advancing patient-specific therapies from bench to bedside.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2026Review
- Redefining cellular reprogramming with advanced genomic technologies.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026Review
- Mechanomedicine.Nature reviews bioengineering · 2026Article
- Telomerase-active urine-derived stem cells: Regenerative solutions for aging.Ageing research reviews · 2026Review
- Generation of Donor-Specific iPSC for Modelling Lysosomal Storage Disorders.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Altered genome induced immune response of iPSCs.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Generation and characterization of human induced pluripotent stem cells from neuropathologically confirmed multiple system atrophy patient-derived fibroblasts.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Robust generation of clinically applicable human pluripotent stem cells from peripheral blood by chemical reprogramming.Cell discovery · 2025Article
- NN15-017 promotes human pluripotent stem cell proliferation and generation.Regenerative therapy · 2025Article
- A xeno-free red blood cell differentiation formula models sickle cell disease from somatically sourced patient iPSCs.Experimental hematology · 2025Article
- Type I IFNs Decrease SARS-CoV-2 Replication in Human Cardiomyocytes and Increase Cytokine Production in Macrophages.Journal of clinical immunology · 2025Article
- Transcriptomic Convergence and the Female Protective Effect in Autism.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
228 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
29 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) are useful in disease modeling and drug discovery, and they promise to provide a new generation of cell-based therapeutics. To date there has been no systematic evaluation of the most widely used techniques for generating integration-free hiPSCs. Here we compare Sendai-viral (SeV), episomal (Epi) and mRNA transfection mRNA methods using a number of criteria. All methods generated high-quality hiPSCs, but significant differences existed in aneuploidy rates, reprogramming efficiency, reliability and workload. We discuss the advantages and shortcomings of each approach, and present and review the results of a survey of a large number of human reprogramming laboratories on their independent experiences and preferences. Our analysis provides a valuable resource to inform the use of specific reprogramming methods for different laboratories and different applications, including clinical translation.
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.