Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26906236›Full record

ArticleStem cells and development2016

Automated Electrophysiological and Pharmacological Evaluation of Human Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Cardiomyocytes.

Divya Rajamohan, Spandan Kalra, Minh Duc Hoang, Vinoj George, Andrew Staniforth, Hugh Russell, Xuebin Yang, Chris Denning

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Stem cells and development, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. High-throughput methods for cardiac cellular electrophysiology studies: the road to personalized medicine.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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.

Divya Rajamohan1 Division of Cancer and Stem Cells, School of Medicine, Wolfson Centre for Stem Cells, Tissue Engineering & Modelling, University of Nottingham , Nottingham, United Kingdom .
Spandan Kalra1 Division of Cancer and Stem Cells, School of Medicine, Wolfson Centre for Stem Cells, Tissue Engineering & Modelling, University of Nottingham , Nottingham, United Kingdom .
Minh Duc Hoang1 Division of Cancer and Stem Cells, School of Medicine, Wolfson Centre for Stem Cells, Tissue Engineering & Modelling, University of Nottingham , Nottingham, United Kingdom .
Vinoj George1 Division of Cancer and Stem Cells, School of Medicine, Wolfson Centre for Stem Cells, Tissue Engineering & Modelling, University of Nottingham , Nottingham, United Kingdom .
Andrew Staniforth2 Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust , Department of Cardiology, Nottingham, United Kingdom .
Hugh Russell3 Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering Group, Department of Oral Biology, University of Leeds, St. James's University Hospital , Leeds, United Kingdom .
Xuebin Yang3 Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering Group, Department of Oral Biology, University of Leeds, St. James's University Hospital , Leeds, United Kingdom .
Chris Denning1 Division of Cancer and Stem Cells, School of Medicine, Wolfson Centre for Stem Cells, Tissue Engineering & Modelling, University of Nottingham , Nottingham, United Kingdom .

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/E006159/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/G021821/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/B/06164British Heart Foundation PG/09/027/27141British Heart Foundation PG/14/59/31000British Heart Foundation SP/15/9/31605Medical Research Council G0801098Medical Research Council G113/30Medical Research Council MR/M017354/1National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research NC/C013105/1National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research NC/C013202/1National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research NC/K000225/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Automated planar patch clamp systems are widely used in drug evaluation studies because of their ability to provide accurate, reliable, and reproducible data in a high-throughput manner. Typically, CHO and HEK tumorigenic cell lines overexpressing single ion channels are used since they can be harvested as high-density, homogenous, single-cell suspensions. While human pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (hPSC-CMs) are physiologically more relevant, these cells are fragile, have complex culture requirements, are inherently heterogeneous, and are expensive to produce, which has restricted their use on automated patch clamp (APC) devices. Here, we used high efficiency differentiation protocols to produce cardiomyocytes from six different hPSC lines for analysis on the Patchliner (Nanion Technologies GmbH) APC platform. We developed a two-step cell preparation protocol that yielded cell catch rates and whole-cell breakthroughs of ∼80%, with ∼40% of these cells allowing electrical activity to be recorded. The protocol permitted formation of long-lasting (>15 min), high quality seals (>2 GΩ) in both voltage- and current-clamp modes. This enabled density of sodium, calcium, and potassium currents to be evaluated, along with dose-response curves to their respective channel inhibitors, tetrodotoxin, nifedipine, and E-4031. Thus, we show the feasibility of using the Patchliner platform for automated evaluation of the electrophysiology and pharmacology of hPSC-CMs, which will enable considerable increase in throughput for reliable and efficient drug evaluation.

Indexed as

Action PotentialsCalciumCell DifferentiationCells, CulturedHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysHumansMyocytes, CardiacPatch-Clamp TechniquesPluripotent Stem CellsPotassiumPotassium Channel BlockersPrimary Cell CultureSodiumSodium Channel BlockersCalciumPotassiumPotassium Channel BlockersSodiumSodium Channel Blockers

Identifiers

PMID26906236
PMCPMC4790208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.