ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2015
Induced Pluripotency and Gene Editing in Disease Modelling: Perspectives and Challenges.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Novel Approaches Used to Examine and Control Neurogenesis in Parkinson's Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Diversification of reprogramming trajectories revealed by parallel single-cell transcriptome and chromatin accessibility sequencing.Science advances · 2020Article
- Versatility of Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPSCs) for Improving the Knowledge on Musculoskeletal Diseases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Global H3.3 dynamic deposition defines its bimodal role in cell fate transition.Nature communications · 2018Article
- Expression of Pluripotency Genes in Chondrocyte-Like Cells Differentiated from Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018Article
- Review
- Induced pluripotent stem cell technology: a decade of progress.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2017Review
- Using CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated GLA Gene Knockout as an In Vitro Drug Screening Model for Fabry Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2016Article
- Genome Editing of the CYP1A1 Locus in iPSCs as a Platform to Map AHR Expression throughout Human Development.Stem cells international · 2016Article
- Induced pluripotent stem cells as a cellular model for studying Down Syndrome.Journal of stem cells & regenerative medicine · 2016Review
- Current status and future prospects of mesenchymal stem cell therapy for liver fibrosis.Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. BReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Embryonic stem cells (ESCs) are chiefly characterized by their ability to self-renew and to differentiate into any cell type derived from the three main germ layers. It was demonstrated that somatic cells could be reprogrammed to form induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) via various strategies. Gene editing is a technique that can be used to make targeted changes in the genome, and the efficiency of this process has been significantly enhanced by recent advancements. The use of engineered endonucleases, such as homing endonucleases, zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs) and Cas9 of the CRISPR system, has significantly enhanced the efficiency of gene editing. The combination of somatic cell reprogramming with gene editing enables us to model human diseases in vitro, in a manner considered superior to animal disease models. In this review, we discuss the various strategies of reprogramming and gene targeting with an emphasis on the current advancements and challenges of using these techniques to model human diseases.
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.