ReviewJournal of neurogenetics2015
Using human induced pluripotent stem cells to model cerebellar disease: hope and hype.
Review in Journal of neurogenetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postnatal Migration of Cerebellar Interneurons.Brain sciences · 2017Review
- The translational potential of human induced pluripotent stem cells for clinical neurology : The translational potential of hiPSCs in neurology.Cell biology and toxicology · 2017Review
- Evaluation of inter-batch differences in stem-cell derived neurons.Stem cell research · 2016Article
- Human Stem Cell-Derived Astrocytes: Specification and Relevance for Neurological Disorders.Current stem cell reportsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The cerebellum forms a highly ordered and indispensible component of motor function within the adult neuraxis, consisting of several distinct cellular subtypes. Cerebellar disease, through a variety of genetic and acquired causes, results in the loss of function of defined subclasses of neurons, and remains a significant and untreatable health care burden. The scarcity of therapies in this arena can partially be explained by unresolved disease mechanisms due to inaccessibility of human cerebellar neurons in a relevant experimental context where initiating disease mechanisms could be functionally elucidated, or drug screens conducted. In this review we discuss the potential promise of human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) for regenerative neurology, with a particular emphasis on in vitro modelling of cerebellar degeneration. We discuss progress made thus far using hiPSC-based models of neurodegeneration, noting the relatively slower pace of discovery made in modelling cerebellar dysfunction. We conclude by speculating how strategies attempting cerebellar differentiation from hiPSCs can be refined to allow the generation of accurate disease models. This in turn will permit a greater understanding of cerebellar pathophysiology to inform mechanistically rationalised therapies, which are desperately needed in this field.
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.