ArticleNature communications2016
Whole-genome mutational burden analysis of three pluripotency induction methods.
Article in Nature communications, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 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
59 citing papers in PubMed, 129 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genomic analysis reveals multi-level resistance network linking oxidative stress pathway mutations to cefiderocol resistance and clonal evolution inFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- NN15-017 promotes human pluripotent stem cell proliferation and generation.Regenerative therapy · 2025Article
- Genomic map of the functionally extinct northern white rhinoceros (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Tracing genomic instability in induced mesenchymal stromal cell manufacture: an integration-free transfection approach.Experimental & molecular medicine · 2025Article
- A comprehensive analysis of induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) production and applications.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Review
- Combining Off-flow, a Nextflow-coded program, and whole genome sequencing reveals unintended genetic variation in CRISPR/Cas-edited iPSCs.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Article
- Modulating DNA Polα Enhances Cell Reprogramming Across Species.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- iPS cell generation-associated point mutations include many C > T substitutions via different cytosine modification mechanisms.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Article
- Carvedilol Phenocopies PGC-1α Overexpression to Alleviate Oxidative Stress, Mitochondrial Dysfunction and Prevent Doxorubicin-Induced Toxicity in Human iPSC-Derived Cardiomyocytes.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- In vitro germ cell induction from fertile and infertile monozygotic twin research participants.Cell reports. Medicine · 2022Article
- Substantial somatic genomic variation and selection for BCOR mutations in human induced pluripotent stem cells.Nature genetics · 2022Article
- Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells: From Cell Origin, Genomic Stability, and Epigenetic Memory to Translational Medicine.Stem cells (Dayton, Ohio) · 2022Review
- Cellular and Engineered Organoids for Cardiovascular Models.Circulation research · 2022Review
- Human induced pluripotent stem cells display a similar mutation burden as embryonic pluripotent cellsiScience · 2022Article
- Review
- Insertion/deletion and microsatellite alteration profiles in induced pluripotent stem cells.Stem cell reports · 2021Article
- Reprogramming enriches for somatic cell clones with small-scale mutations in cancer-associated genes.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2021Article
- Review
- Rewinding Extinction in the Northern White Rhinoceros: Genetically Diverse Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Bank for Genetic Rescue.Stem cells and development · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
There is concern that the stresses of inducing pluripotency may lead to deleterious DNA mutations in induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) lines, which would compromise their use for cell therapies. Here we report comparative genomic analysis of nine isogenic iPSC lines generated using three reprogramming methods: integrating retroviral vectors, non-integrating Sendai virus and synthetic mRNAs. We used whole-genome sequencing and de novo genome mapping to identify single-nucleotide variants, insertions and deletions, and structural variants. Our results show a moderate number of variants in the iPSCs that were not evident in the parental fibroblasts, which may result from reprogramming. There were only small differences in the total numbers and types of variants among different reprogramming methods. Most importantly, a thorough genomic analysis showed that the variants were generally benign. We conclude that the process of reprogramming is unlikely to introduce variants that would make the cells inappropriate for therapy.
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.