Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26254731›Full record

ArticleBrain research2016

Comparative neurotoxicity screening in human iPSC-derived neural stem cells, neurons and astrocytes.

Ying Pei, Jun Peng, Mamta Behl, Nisha S Sipes, Keith R Shockley, Mahendra S Rao, Raymond R Tice, Xianmin Zeng

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Brain research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing 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

65 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Exploring huntington's disease from a neurodevelopmental perspective.International journal of biological sciences · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Cytotoxicity of Dhanwantharaarishtam on hiPSC Cells - AnJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Ying PeiXCell Science Inc., Novato, CA, USA.
Jun PengBuck Institute for Research on Aging, Novato, CA, USA.
Mamta BehlNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC 27713, USA.
Nisha S SipesNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC 27713, USA.
Keith R ShockleyNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC 27713, USA.
Mahendra S RaoNxCell Science, Novato, CA, USA.
Raymond R TiceNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC 27713, USA.
Xianmin ZengXCell Science Inc., Novato, CA, USA; Buck Institute for Research on Aging, Novato, CA, USA. Electronic address: xzeng@xcellscience.com.

Funding

Toxicological Assessments for the National Toxicology ProgramZIAES103316 · NIEHS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES · PI WALKER, NIGEL J · 2016 to 2019
$31.9M
Biomolecular Screening and Alternative Approaches for the National Toxicology ProgramZIAES103318 · NIEHS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CASEY, WARREN · 2016 to 2021
$25.0M
Analysis of Quantitative High Throughput Screening DataZIAES102865 · NIEHS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES · PI SHOCKLEY, KEITH · 2010 to 2025
$2.8M
Development of a neurotoxicity tool kitR44ES023522 · NIEHS · XCELL SCIENCE, INC. · PI ZENG, XIANMIN · 2016 to 2017
$1.4M
Novel Assays for Screening the Effects of Chemical Toxicants on Cell DifferentiatR43ES023522 · NIEHS · XCELL SCIENCE, INC. · PI ZENG, XIANMIN · 2013 to 2013
$225k
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 ES999999NIEHS NIH HHS 1R43ES023522-01NIEHS NIH HHS R43 ES023522NIEHS NIH HHS R44 ES023522
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) and their differentiated derivatives offer a unique source of human primary cells for toxicity screens. Here, we report on the comparative cytotoxicity of 80 compounds (neurotoxicants, developmental neurotoxicants, and environmental compounds) in iPSC as well as isogenic iPSC-derived neural stem cells (NSC), neurons, and astrocytes. All compounds were tested over a 24-h period at 10 and 100 μM, in duplicate, with cytotoxicity measured using the MTT assay. Of the 80 compounds tested, 50 induced significant cytotoxicity in at least one cell type; per cell type, 32, 38, 46, and 41 induced significant cytotoxicity in iPSC, NSC, neurons, and astrocytes, respectively. Four compounds (valinomycin, 3,3',5,5'-tetrabromobisphenol, deltamethrin, and triphenyl phosphate) were cytotoxic in all four cell types. Retesting these compounds at 1, 10, and 100 μM using the same exposure protocol yielded consistent results as compared with the primary screen. Using rotenone, we extended the testing to seven additional iPSC lines of both genders; no substantial difference in the extent of cytotoxicity was detected among the cell lines. Finally, the cytotoxicity assay was simplified by measuring luciferase activity using lineage-specific luciferase reporter iPSC lines which were generated from the parental iPSC line. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled SI: PSC and the brain.

Indexed as

AstrocytesCell DifferentiationCell LineCells, CulturedDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalHumansInduced Pluripotent Stem CellsNeural Stem CellsNeuronsNeurotoxicity SyndromesAstrocytesDrug screeningiPSCLineage-specific reporter linesNeural stem cellsNeuronsNeurotoxicity

Identifiers

PMID26254731
PMCPMC5032144

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.