Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26607174›Full record

ReviewStem cells translational medicine2016

Challenging Regeneration to Transform Medicine.

Ann Tsukamoto, Stewart E Abbot, Lisa C Kadyk, Natalie D DeWitt, David V Schaffer, Jason A Wertheim, Kevin J Whittlesey, Michael J Werner

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Stem cells translational medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Effects of residual HRegenerative therapy · 2018
    Article
  8. Acellular human lung scaffolds to model lung disease and tissue regeneration.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2018
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
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.

Ann TsukamotoStemCells, Inc., Newark, California, USA Ann.Tsukamoto@stemcellsinc.com.
Stewart E AbbotCelgene Cellular Therapeutics, Warren, New Jersey, USA.
Lisa C KadykCalifornia Institute for Regenerative Medicine, San Francisco, California, USA.
Natalie D DeWittCalifornia Institute for Regenerative Medicine, San Francisco, California, USA.
David V SchafferDepartment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA.
Jason A WertheimComprehensive Transplant Center, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Kevin J WhittleseyCalifornia Institute for Regenerative Medicine, San Francisco, California, USA.
Michael J WernerHolland & Knight, Washington, D.C., USA Alliance for Regenerative Medicine, Washington, D.C., USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledThe aging population in the U.S. and other developed countries has led to a large increase in the number of patients suffering from degenerative diseases. Transplantation surgery has been a successful therapeutic option for certain patients; however, the availability of suitable donor organs and tissues significantly limits the number of patients who can benefit from this approach. Regenerative medicine has witnessed numerous recent and spectacular advances, making the repair or replacement of dysfunctional organs and tissues an achievable goal. Public-private partnerships and government policies and incentives would further catalyze the development of universally available donor tissues, resulting in broad medical and economic benefits. This article describes a Regenerative Medicine Grand Challenge that the Alliance for Regenerative Medicine recently shared with the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy in response to a White House call to action in scientific disciplines suggesting that the development of "universal donor tissues" should be designated as a Regenerative Medicine Grand Challenge. Such a designation would raise national awareness of the potential of regenerative medicine to address the unmet needs of many diseases and would stimulate the scientific partnerships and investments in technology needed to expedite this goal. Here we outline key policy changes and technological challenges that must be addressed to achieve the promise of a major breakthrough in the treatment of degenerative disease. A nationalized effort and commitment to develop universal donor tissues could realize this goal within 10 years and along the way result in significant innovation in manufacturing technologies. SIGNIFICANCE: Regenerative therapies, in which dysfunctional or degenerating cells, tissues, or organs are repaired or replaced, have the potential to cure chronic degenerative diseases. Such treatments are limited by a shortage of donor organs and tissues and the need for immune suppression to prevent rejection. This article proposes a 21st Century Grand Challenge that would address this significant medical need by coordinating a national effort to convene the multidisciplinary expertise needed to manufacture functional and engraftable cells, tissues, or organs that could be made available to any patient without significant risk of rejection-so-called universal donor tissues.

Indexed as

RegenerationHumansNeurodegenerative DiseasesRegenerative MedicineUnited States

Identifiers

PMID26607174
PMCPMC4704880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.