Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26451119›Full record

ReviewStem cells and cloning : advances and applications2015

Mesenchymal and induced pluripotent stem cells: general insights and clinical perspectives.

Helena D Zomer, Atanásio S Vidane, Natalia N Gonçalves, Carlos E Ambrósio

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Stem cells and cloning : advances and applications, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

74 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

14 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

4 authors.

Helena D ZomerDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Atanásio S VidaneDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Natalia N GonçalvesDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Carlos E AmbrósioDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Animal Sciences and Food Engineering, University of São Paulo, Pirassununga, SP, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mesenchymal stem cells have awakened a great deal of interest in regenerative medicine due to their plasticity, and immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory properties. They are high-yield and can be acquired through noninvasive methods from adult tissues. Moreover, they are nontumorigenic and are the most widely studied. On the other hand, induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells can be derived directly from adult cells through gene reprogramming. The new iPS technology avoids the embryo destruction or manipulation to generate pluripotent cells, therefore, are exempt from ethical implication surrounding embryonic stem cell use. The pre-differentiation of iPS cells ensures the safety of future approaches. Both mesenchymal stem cells and iPS cells can be used for autologous cell transplantations without the risk of immune rejection and represent a great opportunity for future alternative therapies. In this review we discussed the therapeutic perspectives using mesenchymal and iPS cells.

Indexed as

cell therapycell transplantationiPSMSC

Identifiers

PMID26451119
PMCPMC4592031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.