Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26089913›Full record

ReviewStem cells international2015

Human Urine as a Noninvasive Source of Kidney Cells.

Fanny Oliveira Arcolino, Agnès Tort Piella, Elli Papadimitriou, Benedetta Bussolati, Daniel J Antonie, Patricia Murray, Lamberthus van den Heuvel, Elena Levtchenko

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Stem cells international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing 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

41 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

8 authors.

Fanny Oliveira ArcolinoDepartment of Development and Regeneration, Catholic University Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Agnès Tort PiellaInstitute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Crown Street, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK.
Elli PapadimitriouCenter for Molecular Biotechnology, Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Via Nizza 52, 10126 Turin, Italy.
Benedetta BussolatiCenter for Molecular Biotechnology, Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Via Nizza 52, 10126 Turin, Italy.
Daniel J AntonieInstitute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Crown Street, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK.
Patricia MurrayInstitute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Crown Street, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK.
Lamberthus van den HeuvelDepartment of Development and Regeneration, Catholic University Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Elena LevtchenkoDepartment of Development and Regeneration, Catholic University Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Urine represents an unlimited source of patient-specific kidney cells that can be harvested noninvasively. Urine derived podocytes and proximal tubule cells have been used to study disease mechanisms and to screen for novel drug therapies in a variety of human kidney disorders. The urinary kidney stem/progenitor cells and extracellular vesicles, instead, might be promising for therapeutic treatments of kidney injury. The greatest advantages of urine as a source of viable cells are the easy collection and less complicated ethical issues. However, extensive characterization and in vivo studies still have to be performed before the clinical use of urine-derived kidney progenitors.

Identifiers

PMID26089913
PMCPMC4451513

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.